Quote:
Originally Posted by ahlee
Stars may have more players, that that alone wouldn't explain the difference.
Actually, it pretty much would (and does). And the other aspects on Stars help too. Getting to play 24 tables (or unlimited SNG's) on Stars while only getting to play a maximum of 16 tables on FT makes a big difference to how much a player can potentially win too obviously.
To so definitively determine that the biggest winners would not be affected by the size of the site and number of tables you can play when obviously they can is stupid.
On one site a certain player at 0.5bb/100 can get in 100k hands on FT in the same time they could get in about 150k hands on Stars. Yeah, that would account for a pretty significant difference in total winning assuming they kept the same win-rate across both sites.
Quote:
Do the differences in the RNG of the sites have an significant impact on winrates and winnings ?
No. To think otherwise is ******ed.
Quote:
Generating something random will always bring up a bias since you are not able to get to infinity....Maybe the bias at FT is bigger....
What do you guys think about that ?
Any small changes in the RNG don't magically make the cards feel different or for flushes to hit more often or anything stupid like that. The difference you are talking about in the method of the randomness doesn't change anything. It's like wondering if a live game changes if one dealer does 7 shuffles of the cards vs. another dealer who does 6 shuffles. It doesn't matter how you go about mixing up the cards. The cards get mixed up randomly so you're fine.
If you are losing at one site or another it's not the site ganging up against you with a skewed deal. It's you not being as good as you think you are at the game of poker.