IndianaV8 has posted an analysis of preflop all-ins from his massive hand database. See source at
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...h-beta-452536/

This is showing all preflop all-ins for 102 million cash game hands. People have asked for this type of study many times in the zoo. This is a rough cut, but it clearly shows that preflop all-ins come out just the way they should in the long run.

Number of hands parsed: 102661557
Total all-in situations: 400804 (Once per 256.14 hands).

Preflop Equity %.....#All-ins...#Wins...%
0 - 10.....................13675 1026 8%
10 - 20................124839 25435 20%
20 - 30................. 72605 21361 29%
30 - 40................. 77187 28437 37%
40 - 50................111568 51068 46%
50 - 60............... 113428 61430 54%
60 - 70................. 77187 48750 63%
70 - 80................. 72605 51244 71%
80 - 90................ 124839 99404 80%
90 - 100................ 13675 12649 92%

Notice all but the end ranges are near the middle of their range. To see why those are not in the middle, all we have to do is look at what matchups occur in those ranges.

Pair vs. same high card (dominated) is always pretty close to 92/8. That's why the 0-10% range wins 8% and the 90-100% range wins 92%. There aren't any other matchup types in that range.

Now look at the 10-20% range and the 70-80% ranges. Pair vs. pair matchups are always between 82/18 and 80/20 And pair vs. lower suited connector is always around 77/23. What else can happen in this range? Not much, so that puts us at around the 80% mark and 20% mark.

So this chart shows that of 102 million hands on several major poker sites, preflop all-ins came out just where they would be expected to come out. No sign of rigging here.

Crossposted in rigged thread.

Most people think it's rigged because they only remember the bad beats. But if they keep a log of every time they shove preflop ( example: AA vs KK ) they will see for themselves that most of the time their hand holds.

People tend to forget how many times their hands held but they ALWAYS remember when it doesn't.

Spade = Shill, obv.

Oh this proves everything! I am sure this was audited by Price Waterhouse...

I honestly don't think this is completely true. Most people think it's rigged because variance gets clustered. You don't win every other coin-flip. You lose 15, win 6, lose another 3, win 8, etc. It's hard to remember winning 20 of 30 coin-flips last month when you've just lost 12 in one day.

-red

haha i like spades post esp his probability ones.

But this one how can we verify the data is correct? Again im not saying its rigged or its not. I dont know. But i like to question everything. We dont know if that data is legit.

very elegant

I'm sure it was audited by your mom.

Edit/MH: This post has been deleted and the OP edited, to avoid confusion, per spadebidder.

400K hands one has 80% to win, another has 20% to win. So, what that means is - that no mater what, one of them will win ?

wat?

This strikes me as pretty odd. Did you do this on all deep-stack tables or something? With all the shortstackers and maniacs out there they are really that rare?

Dude you don't post proof in rigged threads, you type random hands out in all caps and we just take your word for it.. is this your first time at 2+2?

This was corrected on the updated chart in post #9, and has preflop all-ins once for every 256 hands dealt. The first one was a subset that only tallied 2 or more players all-in preflop. It left out the cases where only 1 player is all-in preflop but got called. The count went up by almost 20x.

spadebidder

It's also interesting to note that preflop all-ins are occurring about once every 4000 hands in cash games. Tourneys would be quite a bit higher.

i think you got that pretty badly wrong

A+

It was wrong, and is corrected in post #9.

*

Edit/MH: OP has been corrected, per spadebidder.

I appreciate your work spadebidder, but as markusgc surely knows, online poker is rigged. I got pocket 7s all in against 66 today and lost. RIGGED

JOPKE!1!1!! 2+TWU IZ RIZZED OBVIPLEASLY!!!1!!1!

Crack head ^^

Whatever happened to Coopers? They probably offed him because he suspected it was rigged.

Who cares about a billion hands?

It's rigged against me. That's all I care about.

this makes me feel good. I guess my sample size just ain't big enough at 40k all in pfs

If you missed the updated data in another thread, here it is. This one is more granular, using 2% equity ranges. It also modified the algorithm used to determine when at least one player is all-in preflop, so the total number of all-ins shown went up slightly.


Number of hands parsed: 102,661,557
Total preflop all-in situations: 535,950 (Once per 191.55 hands).

[Preflop Equity %): #All-ins #Wins Win%

[0.00 - 0.02): 0 0 0.0%
[0.02 - 0.04): 0 0 0.0%
[0.04 - 0.06): 46 2 0.043%
[0.06 - 0.08): 10202 682 0.067%
[0.08 - 0.10): 2071 152 0.073%
[0.10 - 0.12): 1722 197 0.114%
[0.12 - 0.14): 9424 1274 0.135%
[0.14 - 0.16): 3858 608 0.158%
[0.16 - 0.18): 7436 1338 0.18%
[0.18 - 0.20): 93772 17905 0.191%
[0.20 - 0.22): 2168 516 0.238%
[0.22 - 0.24): 2325 547 0.235%
[0.24 - 0.26): 29000 7304 0.252%
[0.26 - 0.28): 26160 6815 0.261%
[0.28 - 0.30): 44814 13266 0.296%
[0.30 - 0.32): 40589 12854 0.317%
[0.32 - 0.34): 23314 7631 0.327%
[0.34 - 0.36): 22147 7530 0.34%
[0.36 - 0.38): 18191 6784 0.373%
[0.38 - 0.40): 18082 7091 0.392%
[0.40 - 0.42): 19580 8061 0.412%
[0.42 - 0.44): 47204 21103 0.447%
[0.44 - 0.46): 52790 24259 0.46%
[0.46 - 0.48): 38580 18403 0.477%
[0.48 - 0.50): 21610 10650 0.493%
[0.50 - 0.52): 23340 11825 0.507%
[0.52 - 0.54): 38566 20171 0.523%
[0.54 - 0.56): 52804 28537 0.54%
[0.56 - 0.58): 47203 26100 0.553%
[0.58 - 0.60): 19581 11520 0.588%
[0.60 - 0.62): 18082 10991 0.608%
[0.62 - 0.64): 18191 11407 0.627%
[0.64 - 0.66): 22147 14617 0.66%
[0.66 - 0.68): 23314 15683 0.673%
[0.68 - 0.70): 40589 27735 0.683%
[0.70 - 0.72): 44814 31548 0.704%
[0.72 - 0.74): 26160 19345 0.739%
[0.74 - 0.76): 29000 21696 0.748%
[0.76 - 0.78): 2325 1778 0.765%
[0.78 - 0.80): 2168 1652 0.762%
[0.80 - 0.82): 93772 75867 0.809%
[0.82 - 0.84): 7436 6098 0.82%
[0.84 - 0.86): 3858 3250 0.842%
[0.86 - 0.88): 9424 8150 0.865%
[0.88 - 0.90): 1722 1525 0.886%
[0.90 - 0.92): 2071 1919 0.927%
[0.92 - 0.94): 10202 9520 0.933%
[0.94 - 0.96): 46 44 0.957%
[0.96 - 0.98): 0 0 0.0%
[0.98 - 1.00): 0 0 0.0%

I looked at about 80,000 sng hands of my own a while back and found that my total all in equity was about 57%. Not bad, means I'm getting it in pretty wisely. When I looked at my results I found that I won........... 57% of the hands. So obviously I'm getting a fair deal.

Or am I.

I still felt like I wasn't winning at the rate I should have been.

So what I did next was break down the numbers by position from the bubble. (9 or 10 seated games) and all of a sudden the numbers weren't quite so clear. I ran pretty much at expectation for most of the spots, even a few points ahead early in the tourney and when it got heads up. However, ON THE BUBBLE I ran an astonishing 17 pts (51% equity vs 34% actually won) BELOW expectation. In other words, on all in hands on the bubble where I should have been winning half I was losing 2/3rds. Tough to make money in that scenario.

Obviously you can't draw any serious conclusions from this relatively small number of hands. But I think it illustrates that you can have skewed results without an obvious distortion of gross expectations.

Bottom line, if an online site wanted to "level the outcomes" they could "take a little here, give back a little there" in ways that would be very hard to detect but devastating to your bottom line.

When we consider these possibilities I sometimes wonder if we are asking the wrong question when we say "why would XYZ possibly put their huge profits at risk by messing with the deal"? Maybe a more apt question would be, "how could XYZ poker site possibly survive WITHOUT leveling the outcomes"? In my database (both omaha and nlhe) I see that roughly half the players are winners and half are losers. I find that very hard to believe.