Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > Internet Poker > Internet Poker

Notices

Internet Poker Discussions of Internet poker venues.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-14-2008, 06:40 PM   #346
centurion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 101
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

If any of the major sites are doing something significant with all-ins that the other sites are not, it would show up, I believe, by examining results of fishermen, classified by site.
donkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2008, 06:20 PM   #347
journeyman
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 222
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

I for one am convinced in some sort of odd % of wins when someone is all-in vs another hand. It seems the all-in hand wins way more often than it should considering the holdings of the hands. With that being said, I have never cared to put in the time to analyze any hands, but I do have a huge database and am willing to share all hands with anyone that wants them for free. I will also be able to supply 200k+ hands a day for free for anyone that would be interested. PM me a good place to upload all these hands and it will be done. Cheers Pokerstars, let the good times roll.
ucnoles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2008, 01:50 AM   #348
old hand
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: EU
Posts: 1,320
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by MicroBob View Post
I definitely like this as an example.
It shows that on hands that are likely to make it to the river there is a greater chance that the players are holding higher cards.
That's one type of study data one needs when figuring if the cards come out randomly or not, and if the sample does not favor more and more lower cards coming out when the hand progresses, then one can start thinking that the effect of removal is not there like it should be. It also depends of e.g. what starting hands one is playing.
6471849653 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2008, 02:00 AM   #349
old hand
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: EU
Posts: 1,320
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by TakenItEasy View Post
BTW, has anyone else noticed notes disappearing? Nearly 100% of players I play should have at least some starting notes. I always note the number of tables a player is at or hidden in ring games and always note the players OPR stats in tournaments. I often run into players that I or PT recognizes and there are no notes. Perhaps off topic, maybe not.
Not mentioning some smaller sites' problem, I can mention only prima, where I some years ago (they have now a new software) used the ":" mark and any notes I put after it disappeared when I closed the window.

I should also mention that some sites have had or might still have some limitations to how long those notes can be. And then some other matters are if one needs to use a "save" button, and then if one is exporting notes from a tracker.
6471849653 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2008, 04:08 PM   #350
banned
 
Dire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: wasting less time
Posts: 8,581
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Some people were questioning the technical practicality of a site manipulating the deal. PokerStars now openly admits to rigging the deal one of their games: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...-games-303618/

It fits all criteria required.

-server is storing and has constant access to previous actions/cards which should have no legitimate bearing or influence on current or future play
-server is able to analyze the card given by the RNG, reject it based on certain criteria (invisible to the player and outside the rules of the game) and tell it to deal a new one
-simplicity. this sort of action seems to be inherently built into their server - otherwise it can be assumed that they would have gone with the normal rules for the games which would have been more straight forward to implement.

'Could they' is no longer a question.

Last edited by Dire; 09-21-2008 at 04:18 PM.
Dire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2008, 04:15 PM   #351
banned
 
Dire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: wasting less time
Posts: 8,581
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

PokerStars representative Alex Scott also completely nonchalantly states that the rigging in the games was done for the sake of action which is ironic given that 'action rigging' theories have always seemed the most rediculous of the bunch:

whole post

TapirBoy: For instance, suppose I start with 22227, and all six players come along, so I go ahead and draw to the hand knowing that if I make a hand, it will be good and win me a huge pot. Now if it goes far enough for a reshuffle, all my opponents who are drawing at a deuce have better odds to hit one than they ought to!

PokerStars' Alex Scott: Yes, but your odds of improving your hand in the first place are also better, because you cannot pair deuces and are less likely to pair sevens. It's a benefit that everybody shares.
Dire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2008, 04:26 PM   #352
Pooh-Bah
 
illuminati's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Charging Drooler Tax
Posts: 3,612
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

sweet proof itt
illuminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 05:07 AM   #353
Rek
HUZA 2008
 
Rek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Posts: 10,032
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Dire - I don't like Stars altering the game rules but they are not rigging it in the way that this thread is looking for anomolies. It does however show how easily a site could tamper with their RNG if they were so inclined. Very worrying.
Rek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 08:57 AM   #354
banned
 
P1zza_Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: FOR THAC, DA TITTY MAN
Posts: 3,829
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rek View Post
Dire - I don't like Stars altering the game rules but they are not rigging it in the way that this thread is looking for anomalies. It does however show how easily a site could tamper with their RNG if they were so inclined. Very worrying.
stars is doing what MT2R and 1pb were saying, altering cards in place of what was suppose to come b/c of their reasoning (aka code)

a simple code could be put in place just like in the other "rigged" game, so that a player with a greater amount of hands in a certain amount of time will lose to all in situations more frequent then others with not a lot of hands in a certain amount of time
P1zza_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 11:35 AM   #355
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,872
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by P1zza_Man View Post
stars is doing what MT2R and 1pb were saying, altering cards in place of what was suppose to come b/c of their reasoning (aka code)

a simple code could be put in place just like in the other "rigged" game, so that a player with a greater amount of hands in a certain amount of time will lose to all in situations more frequent then others with not a lot of hands in a certain amount of time
What really stops this from happening is a lot of variations of common sense.

- Why would they target specific players? I realize many paranoid people after a bad beat think they are doomswitched, but the reality is that all of us are insignificant to them on an individual basis, so there is really no reason any specific person would be the target.

- The risk of getting caught is fairly substantial. Look at UB/AP which involved embezzlement and inside cheating without even needing to rig the software. Now they are offering all accounts rakeback suddenly, which is probably not a sign that they have undergone significant short term growth. Those room's may very well fail because of this, and yet people believe Stars would rig a low limit game to hurt specific players?

- Look at the reaction to Stars openly changing the rules of this game. Personally I think it was silly to change the rules, because even if their motives were good (ie: more "fun for players) and transparent, the reality is that purists will be enraged with good reason because the odds have changed slightly in the game, while conspiracy nutcases will build a new "See, now what if" line of beliefs with this as "proof." Better if they had just invented a new game with laid out rules if this was their objective.

Is it troubling that they can do this with the RNG? Eh, maybe. I don't think it comes as a major shock to anyone. Anyone who suddenly assumes this means that all games are rigged is being silly, since again by now it would have been detected and even if it was not the odds are someone who worked on it would have come forward by now.


I think Stars definitely underestimated the reaction that their rule change would have, and it shows how careful even the established trusted sites need to be in this industry. It also shows that customers will always be vigilant with pretty much anything and I find that to be very healthy for my trust in the industry.
Monteroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 05:27 PM   #356
banned
 
Dire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: wasting less time
Posts: 8,581
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy View Post
What really stops this from happening is a lot of variations of common sense.

- Why would they target specific players?
There have been many suggestions already mentioned. Most obvious being that if you give the fish slight edges then they stick around longer before leaving/busting, which results in more fish which results in a reputation for 'softer' games which results in more regular players which results in a larger playerbase which results in significantly more revenue for the site, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy View Post
- The risk of getting caught is fairly substantial. Look at UB/AP which involved embezzlement and inside cheating without even needing to rig the software.
The cheaters at UB/AP were mostly caught because they were idiots and damning data was leaked from the site itself. It is significantly more challenging to acquire significant samples of relevant data from the sites, and maybe even more importantly to develop the tools for analysis of said data when trying to discern information on deal fairness. For the superusers players could start noticing some odd things in relatively few hands. For deal modification, a few thousand or even a few million hands doesn't mean a ton. That's even further complicated by the fact that Poker Stars in particular goes well out of their way to prevent any form of datamining.

And the sites will always have plausible deniability aka "variance is a bitch". We'll never be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that any site modified their deal. And without that level of 100% certainty, the site's are at no real risk, well unless somebody leaks internal proof again as in the UB/AP case.
Dire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2008, 05:32 PM   #357
centurion
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 188
Lightbulb A Falsifable experiment - long but it will work.

First off, I'm impressed with how thorough and direct this thread has been, despite the contentious and confusing nature of the subject. Really, the sniping is no worse than in academics .

Secondly, I would wager that the only thing more impressive than what variance can explain is what it absolutely cannot. Talking about EV in a sample this size is getting pretty close, by my back of the envelope.

Third and most importantly, this powerful assertion should be addressed critically if we want to explain it away. I would propose that several factors besides a bastard website might possible explanations. Moreover, I propose a few experiments for obvious ones.

a) Gross error. The calculations ignore something that is generally trivial but will add up over a huge sample size. Like for example the effect of the rake. I hope they include it- and I doubt this is it- I just want to make sure.

b) Failure to identify complete information. The calculation deals with samples where there is more complete information than the software is utilizing. For example, players enter many pots and leave before showdown. Their hands are within a certain range predicted by their VPIP and PFR. Those cards are no longer coming. This COULD explain the effect and there is an easy way to test it.

First, split your sample hands into three groups.

1) Multiple people enter the pot and all go to showdown.

2) Multiple people enter the pot and only two go to showdown.

3) Two people contest the pot the whole way. There must be no limpers or raisers who fold. These hands must be heads up from the first raise onward.

If incomplete information is causing the effect, it will be observed in only group two. If it is observed in all three, that is more worrisome.

Whether or not we observe it in specific samples, try to explain it in sample #2, the sample with the largest expected effect.

Apply prior probabilities to these hands based on the estimated range of the non-showdown players. What fraction of his two cards do you expect to be aces, kings and so on, given his PFR and VPIP from that position? Based on the data you have for the folded opponents' play ask the following:

Are hands that contain cards that improve your hands and not your opponents' (and vice versa) depleted/abundant in the deck that deals the board? How does it change expectation?

If the probability of card depletion is included, does your sample regress towards expectation? I suspect that 50 buy ins difference over this many hands is a trivial amount that card removal could account for.

Furthermore, the fact that opponents DO NOT play hands also alters the likelihood of valuable cards remaining in the deck or collecting in the muck. However, I expect the result there to be more subtle. But, it still could be there. So try that too, and see if it regresses further.

This is a likely source of error that would be grouped more broadly under section c.

c) False discovery. Statistics work best when they're applied exactly in isolation from confounders. Unfortunately myriad factors, not the least of which is multiple testing (an easy mistake to make even for software designers and professional statisticians), can create a test result which spuriously claims significance. In false discovery, these results can be explained away quite rapidly if we identify where the tests were misapplied. Frighteningly, even high profile papers in my field- biomedical research- commit this type of fallacy all the time.

d) There's also the chance that previous error cannot explain any or all of it and you are just far out in the margins. Some poor SOB on 2p2 is bound to be. Life sucks that way.

Good luck. I hope you get to the bottom of it.

Last edited by kirkt; 09-24-2008 at 05:41 PM.
kirkt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2008, 08:23 AM   #358
Pooh-Bah
 
Schwatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 4,504
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

I never believed all this stuff until my run the last 2 months. I honestly don't know any other way to explain what is happening. 90% faves seem like they are coin-flips. Coin-flips are auto-losses.

Please Pokerstars, if you can un doomswitch me I will never complain again. I am not joking either, I don't know what to do.

The graphs are approximately my last 200k hands from 3 different DB's filtered for strictly hands that went to showdown. (which is why the hand count is so low)

This is all 100nl on PokerStars







For all you non-believers out there, I urge you to run your DB through PokerEV. You probably have run good or at least average in your careers.
Schwatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2008, 09:13 AM   #359
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 945
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Ouch man, that's sick.
tautomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2008, 11:25 AM   #360
banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Silver Spring
Posts: 13,993
Re: Official Poker Site Data Analysis and Discussion Thread

Wow. This site has everything. Thanks 2p2. You are a great resource. Maybe I can start a post to help plan my wedding.

If I can weigh in here: I always thought those complaining about "cashout curses", multiple coolers, endless runs of two-out magic, and other accusations of programming misdeeds were just sour grapes. But, alas, I was winning. When I first got on PokerStars, I quickly went through my first $50, but turned my second $50 deposit into $2400 by placing second in three straight 20/180s and crushing the cash game.

Then I cashed out $2k and my luck changed abruptly. I busted out and never thought about it again. Poker was taking too much of my time anyway.

Then I got laid off and noticed I had accumulated a massive amount of FPP's. I turned those FPP's into about 4K in T$, then hit the tables. After about 6 months of play, here are my observations:

1: Players connect on the flop far more often than what is expected by pure chance. This means that overcards beat the pair far more often than 50%, and the limit cash game is volatile. This is the one site where playing limit cash is more profitable (if you know what you are doing) than nl.

2: The low stack is "saved" in tournaments. No matter how far behind, the low stack wins a huge %. AJ>AK, KT>AT, K7>AQ and on and on. I once played in a 45-man SNG where, with 8 people left, the low stack sucked out 12 straight times.

3: I call this one big blind abusal. If you flop top pair on your BB in a limped pot, you will rarely win. I cashed out a couple of weeks ago after a nice run in limit 1/2. Then, I lost top pair on my BB on 6 consecutive rounds. On two of those I had top two pair and lost on the river. Later in the session, I had K8 on the BB to a flop of KK8. Turn 4, river 4...villain had pp 44. Frustrating b/c I'd never play K8 if I wasn't already dealt in.

4: Villains get there often. It's called riverstars or coolerstars for a good reason. I was bounced out of tournaments 8 straight as a heavy favorite to the river starting the day after I cashed out. Some of the beats were sick - to say the least. After looking at my HH's, I found that I was close to a 3:1 favorite in five of them, a 4:1 favorite in two, and a whopping 11:1 favorite in the last. Yes, I said 8 straight!

So here is my advice:

A) Never take a race with a low pair
B) Do not play the low stack on the bubble without a made hand.
C) Always check top pair from the BB and be prepared to lay it down to any action
D) Move down in stakes after cashing out
unrealzeal is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive