Yeah, you can long term. It is simple math actually.

Since you were too afraid to post in the stats forum, I did with this thread.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/25.../#post52311016

We can see what the real stats guys say, and then you can continue to believe whatever it is you like.

Dumbest rig ever...

All the best.

Determine the winner based upon participants is the easy part. It just selects one according to a RNG. The board is then played out based upon the holdings of the randomly chosen player. This board is not random, but rather a program to display their winning hand.

The only variable is participate exiting the game and the only one that matters is the randomly selected winner leaving before the end of the game. The computer is likely programmed to give the randomly selected winner the opportunity to continue with the display of the board

I saw you earlier post and I will respond, but it will have to be a bit later



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You presented your model which is flawed and you presented your model with bias. It will not hold up to an accurate representation of what you are presenting here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Illusive slumming it up at PLO50 today - so much for him having cracked the magical code.

The following terms and conditions are applicable for all transactions and Sweepstakes entries placed with Global Poker and Virtual Gaming Worlds (VGW). The Global Poker Sweepstakes is also subject to the Global Poker Sweepstakes / Prize Promotion Official Rules. We reserve the right to amend these rules at any time. Any amendments will be published and displayed on our Site. You agree that it is your responsibility to check and understand these rules before playing Global Poker.
By participating in the Global Poker Sweepstakes, you acknowledge that you are aged 18 years or above and reside in a jurisdiction where participating in the Global Poker Sweepstakes is legal.

rule 1 in terms of service


"Hi guys. This took a little longer to get together. But here is a FAQ document that should answer a lot of the valid questions you members here at the forum has.

Global Poker Sweepstakes

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)"

Global Poker explained Thread first post

this post also goes and compares them to Publishers Clearing House and McDonalds in how they work and are legal. There Casino site is also a sweepstakes with slot machines displaying wins.


In short, each pot in a ring game is its own individual sweepstakes.
Other sites operate sweepstakes gamesas a tournament, but none have ever used the concept of sweepstakes represented as a virtual currency, used to promote/sell another virtual currency (Gold Coins).
When sweepstakes are represented and played in this way, players can join ring games and enter each sweepstakes as a pot in a single ring game. This model is not possible unless sweepstakes entries can be represented, accumulated and claimed (ie. cashed out) in this fashion. This model and process is part of VGW’s patent pending.




"Let all that go as if it doesn't exist, just explain how software can be programmed to determine a winner in a game of poker prior to the hands being dealt."

That is the point of all this. By their own language each pot is its own sweepstakes. Sweepstakes by definition are pure chance. That means that they draw a winner then use poker to represent the outcome of the sweepstakes draw. To further the theory of it being rigged or juiced, the hands that it represents are used to get more people betting so they take max rake. They have offered zero proof that this is not happening, they have not denied it anywhere, they have totally ignored or refused to answer direct questions about it and yet myself and a few others are the crazy ones for questioning it? WTF

Where is the bias? I proposed a math experiment within your model of how you believe the room works. I quoted you to show your perspective as well. If you want to make anything more clear there then post whatever you like in that thread you believe is appropriate. I in fact strongly encourage you to post your beliefs about your 30 hand sample or how you believe that the extreme long term does not offset a short term tiny little streak. Of course you will not do that, but if you did it would be good for a chuckle short term.

Dumbest rig ever...

All the best.

As usual, you made statements that are completely false in the post.

Monteroy, the problem is that you are just not smart enough to understand statistical modelling. Therefore, you are setting up incorrect statistical modeling as it relates to what your are trying to prove. Jay gave us statistical analysis on your model, but he edited his post when he realized it did not apply to the situation you are supporting. That is the core issue. You do not have the correct model to support your position, but you think you do (just like you thought you wanted to be Player A in my model).

So you need for someone to set up a model for you, then do a statistical analysis. I set up one scenario, of many, that could be done to illustrate how your model has to be set up in order to support you position. (Sorry you could not do the math yourself and figure this out since it was simple math.)

A model for random coin flips is not a poker model. Your theory, in a perfect vacuum, would produces profits based upon blinds stolen as you contend. But the profits are small and risky. Probability does not work in a perfect vacuum. There are short term variances in which you are not accounting for in your model. These variances can lead someone to gain a significant edge over someone leading them to dominate the session.

If the poker game was uncapped, and you could immediately buy in and match your opponent, then you could reduce the impact of the short term variance, but this only increases your exposure for what the stats show is minimal EV from the blinds. You can imply a lot of 'ifs' to make it fit your position. The game in not uncapped at Global Poker.

You have to present to me a model not for coin flips, but to support your assertion that pushing all-in, in a poker game with accumulating stacks, with a 50% or less chance of winning if called, will produce a positive EV. You are not accounting for the accumulating stacks at all in your modeling. Your statistically probability is based upon the events of the current flip being the same as the previous flip, but you are not accounting for the accumulating stacks and how it changes the monetary outcome of the flip.

Your confusion is concerning the expected outcome of the flip (did I win or not) as to the amount wager in the flip (how much did I win or lose and what is my stack in relationship to my opponent). You can win all the blinds in an orbit, then flip with someone who has you covered, now all of those blinds you won previously are now lost. The basis of your model is that you win the blinds. In the model I gave as an example, you would win the blinds 7 straight times, then enter the BB and lose all of them to Player B who had you covered.

There are ways to use the strategy and be profitable, but it is by no means by going all in on every hand. Position 3 bet raises in BB, SB, and on the button will allow you to show a profit in the game against folds. A profit much better than just getting the blinds. Targeting players with shorter stacks than you is also key.

The style you wanted me to showcase to exploit my theory just does not work; however, there is one that does. That is not the point of this thread at all and we really need to get back on point. But again, I think all you are trying to do is get me off point.

Monteroy, your "all the best" @ the end of all your posts is great lol!

Honestly it's not worth arguing with these people or one person who has multiple accounts....

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

That's not what I did. Please don't put words in my mouth. I edited my post because I had stated a separate criticism of your work that I realized afterward was unwarranted. My analysis absolutely does apply to his approach.

You realize this is a trivially easy problem to avoid when implementing his strategy, right? Just don't ever shove when effective stacks with any remaining players are deep. Hell, change tables if you need to. Then the math used in my post holds just fine.

Whoops, sorry. Forgot about the animated gif:

So in a half hour period just now, I flopped the nuts 3 times, middle set once, each time getting my opponent's full stack because they had either smaller sets, top two pair, or huge combo draws..... Yeah, nothing to see here. Totally just variance. Carry on....

Edit: make that 4 times flopping the nuts, except I folded KJo UTG in 6max because I decided to play nitty..... Flop was QT9r, dry runout with 8c OTR, BB had QJ.... Yep. Totally just variance.

I guess your plan should be

1) Stop flopping the nuts
2) ????????
3) Profit


It actually does not matter if this guy is genuine or a weird troll, because there are a ton of people who think just like as he is posting anyway. It is all in good fun, and I have no expectations of getting him to understand anything (assuming he is genuine). If he is genuine then he is trapped by his beliefs, so why not tweak them for amusement!


On that note

You and your team should point out which statements are false and why.



You and your team should post specifically what is wrong with my experiment of your LOLbad beliefs.

They are all based on your assumption that every all-in pre-flop will be 50/50 regardless of the hand because this is a "sweepstakes."

So, just to clear any doubt, lets see if you have the courage to answer this simple scenario

We are playing on Global Poker, I shove pre-flop with my 38o. You stare down at your AA and call

What are the odds of that hand on Global Poker? Are they 50/50 or do you have a huge advantage in that situation.

Cool, let's do just that. Answer the question about the AA vs 38o hand above and we can do just that!


Past results, particularly your fictional ones, do not actually matter. All you need to do is define the way the room works, so

what's chance does 38o have to beat AA pre-flop on Global Poker?


That will depend if you believe any 2 hands all-in pre-flop are a coin flip or not. Are they a coin flip?

Nah, if every heads up all-in is a coin flip then position has no importance. So, is every all-in pre-flop between two players a coin flip (ie: 50/50 ) or not? Yes or no?


Dumbest rig ever...

All the best.

So it's normal to flop the nuts 4 times in an hour, have my opponent always have a big hand when I have it, and have that happen on every table (with me involved or someone else) every day, only on this site.... Cool. Well guys, I guess that's it. This site is clean. Monteroy says it's absolutely just variance, so let's all just continue on and never ask any questions. Thanks for clearing that up bro. I can't believe I ever thought a poker site could be setup for max profits by rigging hands!! Lol.... What a rigtard I am.

Yeah, it is 50/50 - either it happens or it does not.

All the best.

I mean, I've been multitabling on Global for a while and that doesn't happen to me, so... I really don't know what to tell you. I've experienced none of the riggy tales being spun in this thread. If you're convinced that something is so amiss, it should be super easy for you to design & run a simple experiment to test it.

Like i said before let us "rigtards" discuss this thread. And you can create one called battle of the pocket protectors with all your statistical data. Atleast at this point, you know you have a pointdexter who can atleast hold your pen in disscusion or at the very least fog up your glasses cause they challenge your brain more then us simple folk here.

What experiment would you suggest? And once again, I'm not complaining. I'm winning on this site and the player pool is just shoveling me their money. This is possibly the best action I've seen online since 2007-2009.... But that doesn't take away from the fact that the site is running a shady business. If you're multitabling (I am too) and can't see a pattern, I'm not sure what you're looking at.

Keeping showing you ignorance Monterey

Hand holdings have no bearing in the sweepstakes model. It is based upon participants


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, does that mean that if I shove with 38o and you call with AA pre-flop (everyone else folds) that we are both 50% to win? Yes or no?

I asked many times, but you now seem reluctant to give a specific, simple answer to a very basic scenario. Have faith in your beliefs and proudly answer yes or no to this very specific example!

All the best.

You have not answered any question asked of you. Not one. You were discredited today. You ignorance was shown to every one.
You have admitted you are just trolling!

All the best ignorant dude!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes on here yes 100% statisticaly aces crush preflop, and should vs a garbage hand as that but the odds of that hitting are rare. But here you will see 38s in the door followed by the ace add some excitement then a 3 just to mess with you a bit. Look at these odd you see 3 of the same suite on the flop 1:10 hands on this site farcry from the reality of the real odds. How about AAK or KKA 2 diamonds for fun how. How many flops in ten min should you see like that? 2-3 times consecutive seems alittle against the odds, dont you think?
But it happens and i dont understand why you dont see it. Denial maybe. How many times should you be dealt the same exact hand back to back?
Everything about this site is set up for action, if global maintains this is a sweepstakes we will never see a certerfied RNG. They are governed by NY law they state that themselves. Also keep a eye on a player behumble he is trying for a signifgant withdrawl, which i was curious about being in the TOC its states anything over 10k would be investigated before funds are released. This will allow us to put some pieces together of how they opperate.
If you play look at some of these odds, then think how many times in 10min do i see these flops

Three or more of same suit 0.05177 18.3-1 0.13522 6.40-1 0.23589 3.24-1
Four or more of same suit 0.01056 93.7-1 0.03394 28.5-1
Rainbow flop (all different suits) 0.39765 1.51-1 0.10550 8.48-1
Three cards of consecutive rank
(but not four consecutive) 0.03475 27.8-1 0.11820 7.46-1 0.25068 2.99-1
Four cards to a straight (but not five) 0.03877 24.8-1 0.18991 4.27-1
Three or more cards of
consecutive rank and same suit 0.00217 459-1 0.00869 114-1 0.02172 45.0-1
Three of a kind
(but not a full house or four of a kind) 0.00235 424-1 0.00935 106-1 0.02128 46-1
A pair
(but not two pair or three or
four of a kind) 0.16941 4.90-1 0.30417 2.29-1 0.42450 1.36-1
Two pair (but not a full house) 0.01037 95.4-1 0.04716 20.2-1

Anon;

ignorant dude does not play on Global Poker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Anon plays there but his theory contradicts yours. He is saying aces will dominate pre-flop all-in, and the rig is to create action (something you said the room was not doing). So, since you cannot both be right at the same time, which one of you is right?

You seem to respect his opinions (since he disagrees with me), do you also respect his rig beliefs?

All the best.

You try very hard ill give you that. But i never did say AA crushed on GLOBALPOKER. I did say however say statisticly they should domminate against a garbage hand like that.
Maybe slow it down a bit before drawning conclusions that are not vaild.

I'm looking at mostly small uninteresting hands, just like anywhere else. Like I said, I simply have not observed the insane runs of coolers you talked about. I have definitely observed more action than on other sites, but it's been due to players being way too loose, both preflop and how light they'll stack off, especially in multiway pots.

As for an experiment, state clearly exactly how you think probabilities are being altered, restrict the experiment only to the cases where it comes up, and record all results. (Stream it, ideally, so that people won't question the results.) I'm one of the people who believes the null hypothesis that it's a randomly shuffled deck of cards; the experiment depends on what specific alternative hypothesis is being proposed.

I have no stake in this; if you or someone else demonstrates conclusively that shenanigans are going on, you'll have done a valuable service for the poker community. God speed.

Ignorant dude is you Monteroy! You do not play on Global Poker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk