Quote:
Originally Posted by TPTK27
Your post fails to understand the concept.
Why would a site want to deplete everyone's bankroll? There also has to be winners when there are losers, that's the way it goes
My take on the rig is they don't want the solid players beating the losing players too quickly- hence they juice up the action to help weaker hands do better, thus more back and forth money, thus more rake, thus more profit.
The game itself isn't rigged vs anyone in particular, it is just juiced, this in no way stops a well disciplined players from winning money in the long term.
If you can accept certain hands are juiced, and give credit to players even if their range is much wider than the rivered straight but you just know they've got it etc, you can beat the games.
There are a fair few sold players who think the games are juiced, they know it isn't juiced to help one player over another, it is just what it is, bad players will still always lose money to the better players, they just get more bang for their buck.
I guess in many ways, this is good for the solid player as the fish are more likely to deposit again if they had some fun while their money lasted rather than getting completely dominated.
Just think about that last paragraph for a second and put your mindset into all the different POV's, it is pretty niave to think a poker site wouldn't at least consider this.
As said many times ITT, I can't prove anything but I still win so it doesn't really matter. I think the games are rigged, some sites much more than others, I play the ones I'm comfortable with and win at.
Nice to see someone understand whats (most likely) going on.
I dont think it has so much to do with the hands, but the players and their recent history so to say. How much they played, won, lost, how much money they have left, how much and how often they deposited or withdrew and so on. All these factors and many more even has an important role in each and every players psychology. And so does the outcome of the next game/session. It determines who will lose some interest in playing and who will gain.
Obviously this gain or loss of interest is much bigger for rec players than for mass volume players. A site can take (and I think they do) much from the big volume players since they sort of prove they play no matter what. There is no doubt that the mass volume winning players as a group run below EV in OLP! Obv I cant prove that, but if these players just started putting their graphs together you should see it. Question is how many players it would take to do that before you would start believing it.
Think about all the fish players out there. How much difference could you actually make by rigging the games to make them help the poker economy as much as possible. And I am not just talking about rake. Because, you need to look at how much money they give to the big wheel of other players that is the poker economy. The more money in the wheel, the more rake. The more players in the wheel, the more rake.
Most people has high hopes for when they start out playing online poker. They want to win. You dont have fun if you lose. If you start out by losing you dont like OLP. If you start out by winning, you like OLP. And once you have felt how its like to win, you will remember that feeling when you eventually goes busto. Therefore you redeposit... maybe win some more, and then busto again. But losing real money in OLP is not just a bad feeling, the human urge to want to win back is extremey important. This makes people go crazy and play even higher than before. Fish gets a few very lucky days to win a lot, only to let him lose and trigger an urge to redeposit and win it back.
You can get so many times more out of a player by rigging the game than letting it be up to the coincidences. And everytime it is a so little hand sample that everyone explains it as variance.
How easy isnt it to get away with doing stuff like this?
And for those who thinks that million of hand samples proves anyting: Dont you think that when mr Fish sucks out on mr Reg that the "incidents" will be made up for so that mr Reg dont eventually get an abnormal number of suckouts in is HHs? Do anyone really think they would rigg it so hand samples could actually prove what they did....?
"Oh, I have reicived Aces 1253 times. And when I do the math that seems about just right. Nothing dodgy going on here, thats for sure!"