Is PokerStars rigged? - Page 3 - Gambling and Probability

HundredsOfStuff · 04-03-2009, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

"Yes pokerstars and Full Tilt are rigged and here are is my argument. I have read theory on holdem by David Sklansky,"

Has it ever occurred to you that people who read my books get slightly worse cards not because Poker Stars is doing it but rather because God is?

Lol. He leveled us and managed to plug his book at the same time.

Monteroy · 04-03-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustoNoBusto

Yes pokerstars and Full Tilt are rigged and here are is my argument. I have read theory on holdem by David Sklansky, and all the 3 volumes on harrington on holdem and now into the cash ones on my 3rd break from poker. I have also read the poker mindset. Iam in it for the long-run but when you win on a site and continously win and then do the same live, but all of a sudden can no longer win online after you cash-out once there is a obvious problem. I am angry because this is the second time that this has happened to me. The first time i was on Full tilt it happened i made $5,000 in sit and gos and could no longer win even when i had the best hand and when i say that i mean a set, a straight, flush, or full house to only lose to a one/two outer on the river after i induced my opponent to dumping his stack which was a mistake on his part to call me and then my opponent catching or being rewarded time and time again with his one/two outer. So i changed SN to make sure this wasnt just bad luck. Next thing i know iam up another $5,000 on a SN that was in my fiances name and bank account. It was unreal and definetaly reinforced my argument especially when i no longer could win a showdown again due to my opponent continously catching his one/two outer on the river. So i did it again on Full tilt changing my SN and i won like $1,000 and cashed it.

Moving along to the pokerstars, Its happening again i loaded my account with $100 and quickly lost it and took an online break for a month while i read some more books that being poker and motivational books. Came back loaded my account with $25 and sky rocketed up to $600. I am relocating so i went to where i am moving to scope things out on a business/mini-vacation and i was short on cash so i cashed my stars account out and came back and won a few sit and gos and now i can no longer win one on my account. My buddy comes over and sits down next to me on his laptop and i sometimes tell him what i would do in that situation and he wins time and time again but has never cashed his stars account out because he is a action junkie and donks off all his money he wins by the end of the night. But what iam getting at is he still places in the tourneys making the same moves i do but on my account i can no longer cash. I think its because they know i am determined and understand poker has a lot of variance and i can take a bad beat espically when the books iam reading say if the only was you get beat all the time is by a bad beat then you are a good player. Iam a good player because when i play live i still make the same decisions and moves but the cards have already been shuffled and will still come out the same theres no randomness or chosing of the card to help the underdog win the showdown cards are cards and they will fall how there suppose to according to the laws of probability but on these online sites they fall differently and not random i can garauntee that because if iam winning live everynight and losing online everyday and night there is a obvious problem and i will not question myself because my results are there in the form of cash currency when i play live. When i play online i get sucked out with bad beats and iam tired of it. I am moving from Michigan to South Carolina and there is no poker in SC, i will have to drive a minimum of an hour to play. I want to play online i liked playing online but i can no longer win online so its not fun its like chasing a high and thats not me iam competitive and put in to much effort to be an average never winning player online. Someone please help i know somebody agrees with me. Have you ever noticed how hard it is to win again after you have cashed out your online account?

Took a while to actually read through this, but the scenario is fairly common and that involves:

- Small sample sizes and selective memory

- Very poor bankroll management (as seen by the huge up and down swings)

- Poor understanding of the variance of the game

- Lack of emotional control

You may be a better then average player, though simply reading books will not do that in and by itself. However, part of being a successful player is managing all aspects of playing the game, including the areas where you are clearly lacking, such as proper bankroll management.

Your rigged beliefs are simply a rationalization of your losses. You lost because of reasons other then you in your mind. The players suck so it must be the site's fault.

Back up for a minute and answer why would the site itself target you? No offense, but you do not really matter that much to them, none of us do.

Seems you lost a lot, so if the sites are supposed to help losing players, shouldn't you benefit from the rigging?

Reality is you lack the discipline to play the game properly in the long run for now online. Many do. Your choice whether to address these issues, or continue to believe that a massive conspiracy against you is stopping you from achieving the greatness you feel you deserve.

All the best.

absolutefish · 04-03-2009, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogkicker666

Especially when their optimal business strategy is to have everyone stay at about even and rake them into bankruptcy.

This. +1.

absolutefish · 04-03-2009, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireWater

Here is the proof you seek.

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090402201522532

FireWater

lol awesome.

Monteroy · 04-03-2009, 02:24 PM

If their strategy was to have everyone break even or close then we would not see the results we do, namely a small percentage winning a lot, another semi small percentage breaking even, and a lot of people losing at various rates.

Note, I am not suggesting this or any other facts or logic will change a person who wants to believe it is rigged (usually to help rationalize their bad play/losses) from those beliefs. All I am suggesting is that if a theory like this is put forth, whether made up from thin air or not, it at least better match the actual reality.

Reality shows that better players win, bad players (majority) lose in the long run. Pretty much the way any skill based game works once a long term is achieved. If and when there comes a time where everyone is breaking even (before rake) I will be the first one to jump on the OMGRIGGZORS bandwagon

Also, ironically it tends to be losing players who claim it is rigged, when by their definition the losing players should be helped by "the system." Another logic break

If every player was always breaking even less rake I certainly would be curious as that would be contrary to expectation.

For the OP, his losses were likely driven by the issues I mentioned. Lack of discipline, emotional control and bankroll management. Nothing new there, lots of people make that type of mistake in all facets of life, even without intricate conspiracies as a guide.

spadebidder · 04-03-2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireWater

Here is the proof you seek.

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090402201522532

FireWater

Or this one:
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=20090222182227485

The_Jeebus · 04-04-2009, 07:56 AM

sigh I sometimes wonder what they teach in schools nowadays.. maths doesnt seem to be on the agenda

JosephRF · 04-04-2009, 11:44 AM

Hey guys I limped in with AA and got 4 callers (including the blinds). The Flop came 5,6,T Rainbow then the turn came as a 2 and then the river was a J. Everyone checked all the way through where the big blind min bet into the pot I called and so did someone else with KK how did the big blind have have two pairs a pair of 6s and a pair of Ts? Is that even possible?

Is the poker site I gamble at rigged?

Is this another Ultimate Bet scandal in the making?

Is Phil Helmuth reading this and yelling at his computer monitor saying how horrible I played my hand?

**RustyBrooks** · 04-04-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JosephRF

Is Phil Helmuth reading this and yelling at his computer monitor saying how horrible I played my hand?

I don't think so, because I am going to have to assume that anyone who read this is struck dumb.

rwh53 · 04-15-2009, 01:18 PM

Example 1: 1/2 NLHE - At ONE table, over a 200 hand sample on Monday 04/06/09, I saw quads show down 4 times, saw a flopped set-over-set, and watched AA get cracked 3 times by underpairs and SCs.

Example 2: 1/2 NLHE - UTG raises to 12, 1 caller, SB is All-In 45, I am BB and look down at AA, I ISO-shove to 150, UTG CALLS!!!!! the 1 caller folds. We turn them up SB has KK, I (BB) have AA, and UTG shows up with AA. 3 seats in a row KK, AA, AA...uh huh.

SO RIGGED!

Wait....these were all played live, in a reputable card room or casino.

These allegations always seem to come from people who haven't played enough live poker to see just about everything. By the way the card shufflers at my local casino (Foxwoods) operate on an RNG algorithm. Are those rigged too?

Jaywalker · 04-15-2009, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vezj420

However, I DO believe that the RNGs online are a bit skewed...not in anyone's favor, mind you, but skewed. Randomness in real-life is a little better spread out.

In real life, shuffles are, more often than not, not random. IIRC, it takes about seven imperfect riffle shuffles (i.e. the cards from the half-deck in each hand are not combined together one card from the left, one card from the right, one card from the left, one card from the right, etc.) to give a pseudo-random distribution of cards throughout the deck. Even that number seems a bit low (intuitively, not necessarily mathematically) when one considers that there are over 8x10^67 possible permutations for a standard 52 card deck. Still, I've seen plenty of players use fewer than seven shuffles in live games.

For online games in which the RNG's are tested/certified by independent organizations, I suspect the standard for randomness exceeds what would be acceptable to most players in live games.

onthelow · 04-15-2009, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaywalker

In real life, shuffles are, more often than not, not random. IIRC, it takes about seven imperfect riffle shuffles (i.e. the cards from the half-deck in each hand are not combined together one card from the left, one card from the right, one card from the left, one card from the right, etc.) to give a pseudo-random distribution of cards throughout the deck. Even that number seems a bit low (intuitively, not necessarily mathematically) when one considers that there are over 8x10^67 possible permutations for a standard 52 card deck. Still, I've seen plenty of players use fewer than seven shuffles in live games.

For online games in which the RNG's are tested/certified by independent organizations, I suspect the standard for randomness exceeds what would be acceptable to most players in live games.

haha funny i jsut read this the other day at the library in a probability book. It was in the RNG section of this probability book. Its a really good book too. We reading the same book?

I rememebr it said good players know that. That 7 shuffles makes it random and use that to their advantage when it isnt shuffled 7 times.

It also talked about its foolish to think rngs are truly random. Yoir information is like right from the book we have to read the same one.

BucketFoot · 04-16-2009, 07:24 AM

Just wanted to post this wherever it is relevant.

I have gone back and forth on this subject but just now something happened that really makes me question the randomness of these sites.

I play mostly Omaha hi/low and always thought it funny how I would be dealt the same hand at multiple tables. Surely this will happen in random deals as well, but often times the cards are the same suit or even in the same order.

So i didn't really think anything was too strange about me seeing A267 on 2 different tables simultaneously. That is until i decided to play it aggressively and both times lost a showdown to AhAcJ4. THE ACES WERE THE SAME SUIT EVEN!

I can understand having the same hand at multiple tables but c'mon now what are the chances that within a span of 20 seconds my A267 loses to AAJ4 twice. The funniest part is that both times villain made the nuts.

I know some of you will laugh this off and say a couple hands means nothing but I was really spooked out by what happened, enough so to start an account here, and I legitimately think I may have stumbled upon something.

Next time you are multitabling and you get dealt the same hand try to get to a showdown to see if your opponents show you the same hand. Just a hunch.

PokerStars Game #27144826208: Omaha Hi/Lo No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2009/04/16 4:16:08 ET
Table 'Unukalhai II' 9-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: uwilgetbroke ($44.55 in chips)
Seat 2: Phunbaba23 ($24.35 in chips)
Seat 3: BruceLi ($14.25 in chips)
Seat 4: peky1 ($7.20 in chips)
Seat 5: sevup ($58.20 in chips)
Seat 6: mondo nutz ($39.05 in chips)
Seat 7: tacksamkt ($9.60 in chips)
Seat 8: Suicidalik ($24 in chips)
Seat 9: singerboy1 ($47.60 in chips)
mondo nutz: posts small blind $0.25
tacksamkt: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Phunbaba23 [6c 2c Ad 7s]
Suicidalik: folds
singerboy1: calls $0.50
uwilgetbroke: calls $0.50
Phunbaba23: calls $0.50
BruceLi: folds
peky1: folds
sevup: folds
mondo nutz: calls $0.25
tacksamkt: raises $9.10 to $9.60 and is all-in
singerboy1: calls $9.10
uwilgetbroke: raises $34.95 to $44.55 and is all-in
Phunbaba23: calls $23.85 and is all-in
mondo nutz: folds
singerboy1: calls $34.95
*** FLOP *** [Tc Kd As]
*** TURN *** [Tc Kd As] [Qd]
*** RIVER *** [Tc Kd As Qd] [8c]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
singerboy1: shows [2h 5c 8h 3d] (HI: a pair of Eights)
uwilgetbroke: shows [Ac Js Ah 4d] (HI: a straight, Ten to Ace)
uwilgetbroke collected $40.40 from side pot-2
Phunbaba23: mucks hand
uwilgetbroke collected $43.15 from side pot-1
tacksamkt: mucks hand
uwilgetbroke collected $37 from main pot
No low hand qualified

PokerStars Game #27144828987: Omaha Hi/Lo No Limit ($0.50/$1.00) - 2009/04/16 4:16:22 ET
Table 'Gaspra' 9-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: seemsIwin ($139.15 in chips)
Seat 2: Phunbaba23 ($39.65 in chips)
Seat 3: tourbiker ($47.60 in chips)
Seat 4: uwilgetbroke ($201.85 in chips)
Seat 5: dwwg ($99.50 in chips)
Seat 6: 49ers2005 ($184.30 in chips)
Seat 8: Domico ($30.35 in chips)
Seat 9: icecrmking ($20 in chips)
Domico: posts small blind $0.50
icecrmking: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Phunbaba23 [2h As 6s 7d]
seemsIwin: folds
Phunbaba23: calls $1
tourbiker: calls $1
uwilgetbroke: folds
dwwg: folds
49ers2005: folds
Domico: calls $0.50
icecrmking: raises $19 to $20 and is all-in
Phunbaba23: calls $19
tourbiker: folds
Domico: folds
*** FLOP *** [9c Jd 9s]
*** TURN *** [9c Jd 9s] [8d]
*** RIVER *** [9c Jd 9s 8d] [Ad]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
icecrmking: shows [Ac 4c Ah Jh] (HI: a full house, Aces full of Nines)
Phunbaba23: mucks hand
icecrmking collected $39.90 from pot
No low hand qualified

Foolish to think that RNGs are truly random is well said.

rwh53 · 04-16-2009, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucketFoot

PokerStars Game #27144826208: Omaha Hi/Lo No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2009/04/16 4:16:08 ET
Table 'Unukalhai II' 9-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: uwilgetbroke ($44.55 in chips)
Seat 2: Phunbaba23 ($24.35 in chips)
Seat 3: BruceLi ($14.25 in chips)
Seat 4: peky1 ($7.20 in chips)
Seat 5: sevup ($58.20 in chips)
Seat 6: mondo nutz ($39.05 in chips)
Seat 7: tacksamkt ($9.60 in chips)
Seat 8: Suicidalik ($24 in chips)
Seat 9: singerboy1 ($47.60 in chips)
mondo nutz: posts small blind $0.25
tacksamkt: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Phunbaba23 [6c 2c Ad 7s]
Suicidalik: folds
singerboy1: calls $0.50
uwilgetbroke: calls $0.50
Phunbaba23: calls $0.50
BruceLi: folds
peky1: folds
sevup: folds
mondo nutz: calls $0.25
tacksamkt: raises $9.10 to $9.60 and is all-in
singerboy1: calls $9.10
uwilgetbroke: raises $34.95 to $44.55 and is all-in
Phunbaba23: calls $23.85 and is all-in WITH [6c 2c Ad 7s]
mondo nutz: folds
singerboy1: calls $34.95
*** FLOP *** [Tc Kd As]
*** TURN *** [Tc Kd As] [Qd]
*** RIVER *** [Tc Kd As Qd] [8c]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
singerboy1: shows [2h 5c 8h 3d] (HI: a pair of Eights)
uwilgetbroke: shows [Ac Js Ah 4d] (HI: a straight, Ten to Ace)
uwilgetbroke collected $40.40 from side pot-2
Phunbaba23: mucks hand
uwilgetbroke collected $43.15 from side pot-1
tacksamkt: mucks hand
uwilgetbroke collected $37 from main pot
No low hand qualified

PokerStars Game #27144828987: Omaha Hi/Lo No Limit ($0.50/$1.00) - 2009/04/16 4:16:22 ET
Table 'Gaspra' 9-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: seemsIwin ($139.15 in chips)
Seat 2: Phunbaba23 ($39.65 in chips)
Seat 3: tourbiker ($47.60 in chips)
Seat 4: uwilgetbroke ($201.85 in chips)
Seat 5: dwwg ($99.50 in chips)
Seat 6: 49ers2005 ($184.30 in chips)
Seat 8: Domico ($30.35 in chips)
Seat 9: icecrmking ($20 in chips)
Domico: posts small blind $0.50
icecrmking: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Phunbaba23 [2h As 6s 7d]
seemsIwin: folds
Phunbaba23: calls $1
tourbiker: calls $1
uwilgetbroke: folds
dwwg: folds
49ers2005: folds
Domico: calls $0.50
icecrmking: raises $19 to $20 and is all-in
Phunbaba23: calls $19 an ALL-IN bet with [6c 2c Ad 7s]
tourbiker: folds
Domico: folds
*** FLOP *** [9c Jd 9s]
*** TURN *** [9c Jd 9s] [8d]
*** RIVER *** [9c Jd 9s 8d] [Ad]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
icecrmking: shows [Ac 4c Ah Jh] (HI: a full house, Aces full of Nines)
Phunbaba23: mucks hand
icecrmking collected $39.90 from pot
No low hand qualified

Interesting example....however i find it more compelling to comment on the fact that you're willing to get it ALL-IN PREFLOP 35/65 - do you really think you're ever better than a 3:2 dog here?......Here's your sign......

NO offense but I'll be looking for ya at the tables ... (please don't hide from search)

PS - It's even SPOOKIER that it happened on April 16th (4/16) at 4:16 !!!!!!

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

SooperFish24 · 04-16-2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustoNoBusto

Yes pokerstars and Full Tilt are rigged and here are is my argument. I have read theory on holdem by David Sklansky, and all the 3 volumes on harrington on holdem and now into the cash ones on my 3rd break from poker. I have also read the poker mindset. Iam in it for the long-run but when you win on a site and continously win and then do the same live, but all of a sudden can no longer win online after you cash-out once there is a obvious problem. I am angry because this is the second time that this has happened to me. The first time i was on Full tilt it happened i made $5,000 in sit and gos and could no longer win even when i had the best hand and when i say that i mean a set, a straight, flush, or full house to only lose to a one/two outer on the river after i induced my opponent to dumping his stack which was a mistake on his part to call me and then my opponent catching or being rewarded time and time again with his one/two outer. So i changed SN to make sure this wasnt just bad luck. Next thing i know iam up another $5,000 on a SN that was in my fiances name and bank account. It was unreal and definetaly reinforced my argument especially when i no longer could win a showdown again due to my opponent continously catching his one/two outer on the river. So i did it again on Full tilt changing my SN and i won like $1,000 and cashed it.

Moving along to the pokerstars, Its happening again i loaded my account with $100 and quickly lost it and took an online break for a month while i read some more books that being poker and motivational books. Came back loaded my account with $25 and sky rocketed up to $600. I am relocating so i went to where i am moving to scope things out on a business/mini-vacation and i was short on cash so i cashed my stars account out and came back and won a few sit and gos and now i can no longer win one on my account. My buddy comes over and sits down next to me on his laptop and i sometimes tell him what i would do in that situation and he wins time and time again but has never cashed his stars account out because he is a action junkie and donks off all his money he wins by the end of the night. But what iam getting at is he still places in the tourneys making the same moves i do but on my account i can no longer cash. I think its because they know i am determined and understand poker has a lot of variance and i can take a bad beat espically when the books iam reading say if the only was you get beat all the time is by a bad beat then you are a good player. Iam a good player because when i play live i still make the same decisions and moves but the cards have already been shuffled and will still come out the same theres no randomness or chosing of the card to help the underdog win the showdown cards are cards and they will fall how there suppose to according to the laws of probability but on these online sites they fall differently and not random i can garauntee that because if iam winning live everynight and losing online everyday and night there is a obvious problem and i will not question myself because my results are there in the form of cash currency when i play live. When i play online i get sucked out with bad beats and iam tired of it. I am moving from Michigan to South Carolina and there is no poker in SC, i will have to drive a minimum of an hour to play. I want to play online i liked playing online but i can no longer win online so its not fun its like chasing a high and thats not me iam competitive and put in to much effort to be an average never winning player online. Someone please help i know somebody agrees with me. Have you ever noticed how hard it is to win again after you have cashed out your online account?

I agree with you. On one Major poker site I won 2000$ in a tournament and literally couldnt win after that. Also I claimed a 650$ bonus and couldnt win at all during the period following that claim.