Looks like he was banned for spam, which I expect would have been deleted.

Bobo: All I am suggesting is that there is some sort of Handicap built into the programming to even out the odds and make regular players move along . Is that so far fetched that its not a possibility ?

I am not sitting here claiming I was ripped off or that Global in anyway is profiting from such a feature. I am merely suggesting that it makes sense . We all can agree that this is not a skill based game that's being offered as well as Pay Pal would have nothing to do with them if it was .

While its just a theory can you prove otherwise? No you cant but you act with impunity towards anyone wanting a fair discussion. I don't see anywhere in this thread the thought of a Handicapped software theory

A theory is not a hypothesis. Gravity is a theory. Your loonbag idea is a hypothesis.

It has not been proven that the moon is made of spare ribs; thus, the moon must be made of spare ribs. I have another question. It's a simple question doctor. Would you eat the moon if it was made of ribs? Hell, I would. In fact, I'd have seconds!

Wonder if he/she would be singing a different tune if he was actually good at pokers and was winning on Global.

Quick info on The Agnostic:

They play donk style ABC poker and are a CONSTANT complainer that global is rigged in the SNG chats when they lose a hand (They had what seemed to be an emotional breakdown the other day). You would think after almost 1,000 tournaments they would start to understand the swings:

https://www.sharkscope.com/#Player-S...The%20Agnostic

Quick Info on EVZStreaming : Guy is a complete moron at table I caught him soft playing with TheFox23 . I have played exactly ONE game with this guy at the $30.00 Hyper Level . Apparently his account is already under suspicion by Global as I had a nice conversation with security about the tournament in question .

See sir you can call me out all you like and I find it humorous that you think you are somehow winning after 486 games. But why not go down your games played list on Shark Scope and rethink your evaluation . Your losing at just about every game with the exception of the $30.00 hypers which by the way just happens to be the most games you've played against TheFox23 . Good news though Fox is a stand up player with over 30k in earnings . You are just a maniac on a good upswing . Or not. Maybe your account is under scrutiny for other reasons that we have not discovered yet. Either way . Go back to your winning ways sir. You are a player .

Oh and by the way: While I was in this discussion with Global security They sent me Hand histories of you playing against TheFox23 . About ten or so from various different situations. It was some interesting reading. LOL.


Global Poker continually monitors the games for collusion, and we sincerely appreciate you bringing your concerns to our attention. Following your report, we have completed an investigation into the accounts of players 'TheFox23' and 'EVZStreaming


https://globalpoker.zendesk.com/hc/requests/3

https://globalpoker.zendesk.com/hc/requests/5


Global Poker Hand #53499003-b3f5-429e-9c8f-295f0948bc0a: Tournament #5a67cc9c37302a0a990f290a, Hold'em No Limit ($10.00/$20.00 USD) - 2018/01/24 00:07:00 GMT
Table 'mtt0' 6-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: eddy55man ($700.00 in chips)
Seat 2: EVZStreaming ($400.00 in chips)
Seat 3: AKfooorty7 ($480.00 in chips)
Seat 4: TheFox23 ($460.00 in chips)
Seat 5: bk102xl ($460.00 in chips)
Seat 6: RonKo ($500.00 in chips)
AKfooorty7: posts small blind $10.00
TheFox23: posts big blind $20.00
*** HOLE CARDS ***

bk102xl: folds
RonKo: folds
eddy55man: folds
EVZStreaming: raises $40.00 to $60
AKfooorty7: folds
TheFox23: calls $40.00
*** FLOP *** [Jh Ad Qh]
TheFox23: checks
EVZStreaming: checks
*** TURN *** [6d]
TheFox23: bets $65
EVZStreaming: calls $65.00
*** RIVER *** [8c]
TheFox23: bets $335 and is all-in
EVZStreaming: calls $275.00 and is all-in
*** SHOW DOWN ***
TheFox23 shows [Qs Jd]
EVZStreaming: mucks hand
TheFox23 collected $810 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $810.00 | Rake $0
Board [Jh Ad Qh 6d 8c]


Have a nice career STREAMER!

hyper turbo sngs are the most ridiculous form of poker with very little edge if you play them properly so its easy to see why you feel the site's rng is not legit. you're just watching runouts vs a handful of dopes punting in stacks, of course you're gonna see strange things.

Finally a poster with something intelligent to say. Yes I agree with this. One thing though I play Mtts and Turbos also. I stated before I'm not arguing a rigged RNG system or that Global itself is doing anything underhanded . What I am saying is that from the 15 years I have played online poker and the experience and hours I have logged something is not on the level here.

Its not just a bunch of Zynga play chip players using real money and getting lucky. I myself brought up the thought or Idea as I have been so politely corrected that possibly the software handicaps regular players against rec players to allow a smaller win ratio to even out the field . I do not see how this is some far fetched idea. It keeps the recs happy and the regs on a smaller but profitable win rate some higher than others obviously.

Have I seen things that do not make sense yes I have . Do I see quads and straight flushes in my favor and against yes. Did I witness today a flopped royal against KK and AA yes. have I ever been involved in a hand like that no. Does it happen yes. was it my turn to be a part yes.

The guys that just throw out completely that something just isn't correct here are either guys who simply do not understand online poker or guys with advertising interests .

how does one define a regular player? how does one identify a regular player? what if a rec player accidentally plays similar to a regular player? is there a 3rd tier for players who have yet to be classified, or do new players start in one tier until they've been properly identified?

i don't believe your theory is the first of its kind, but I do think I understand where you're coming from. sometimes its hard to understand how often 20% occurs (pair over pair) when in your mind you feel like it should never occur. i think the old chestnut about remembering your toughest beats is much easier than remembering your most fortunate applies here.

i also don't think you've experienced enough of a sample on global in order to truly get a feel for whether or not it is skewed in any way. and even if someone does experience a vast sample of hands, that person would need to be emotionally removed from that sample in order to truly have an honest opinion on the matter.

im not an expert on anything rng related, but i've always thought it would be much more difficult to create an rng that caters to a certain pool of players than it would be to just create a static rng, whether it is truly random or not doesn't particularly matter if its consistent for all players. is the extra work needed in order to favor one set of player over another worth it for a site? i'd assume it doesn't especially for a site that is constantly growing. it would actually make more sense for a site that has become stagnant to try this with their rng than for a site like global who appears to have a constant stream of new players currently.

FWIW, i've been playing global a fair amount the past 2 months(~100k ring game hands), and it feels no different than any other site I've played in the past. i'd guess I've played 10 million+ hands lifetime with the majority being on pokerstars so i feel like i have some sort of grasp on what is supposedly suppose to be going on in a hand of poker or a cluster of hands of poker. i'm not sure what people in this thread need to hear in order to believe the site is in fact dealing a legit game, but for whatever its worth im confident it is legit.

No, of course not - I never suggested it wasn't possible.

So your thinking is that they've cooked up this elaborate sweepstakes model for us rubes to make us think that makes it legal, and meanwhile they've secretly explained to Paypal that they actually have this amazing algorithm that ensures the game isn't skill-based?

No, I'm afraid we can't all agree on that. That actually seems rather unlikely to me.

Of course not. How could I possibly do so? Proving a negative is often rather difficult, if not impossible.

In what way am I acting with impunity?

I'm not going to go back through the thread and reexamine everyone's theories, but it sounds a lot like what I can remember reading here before. And it's definitely a theory that's been put forth countless times in the main rigged thread in the Internet Poker theory, just like your "cashout curse" theory. But why does this matter?

Well put and respected reply : Very convincing the points you bring to the table. I would define a regular player if I was writing it into software as someone who spends a certain amount of hours on the site . I would define a rec player as someone who falls below that threshold but I am certainly no IT guy and possibly I am overthinking this.

My initial goal was to find out exactly what you have presented to me and you have given me valid counter points to think about. My intention was never to engage in a rigged argument as you can see. Do you have any thoughts on the run outs and high amount of quads and straight flushes being seen . I did say that this has worked for as well as against me.

As far as the sites interest goes in having such a program in place I do not see how it would be bad for business . Allowing certain players to have occasional wins even though they got there money in bad keeps them happy and coming back. We can agree this has turned into a rake machine. So while I have plenty to think about that you have presented I have to look further into that particular thought of yours.

Thanks for the discussion on a professional level.

I don't see a suggestion that it's bad for business, but rather that it's not worth all the work that would be involved, when the site is likely quite profitable the way that it's growing. I think it's a compelling point.

I suppose none of it matters in the end. I am not here to argue over the rigged or not rigged garbage. Scroll down and see I have finally gotten a reply from a veteran poster with some valid counter points who obviously understands either my frustration or points .

I would engage in arguing with one said poster who reared his head as you have probably seen but I will keep that also at the lowest level it is at now and will not further engage in replying to someone who obviously has zero clue about anything . Thanks for your reply Bobo.

I was saying that it would not be bad for business . Not implying the last poster said that just to clarify

This all coming from a guy who as of 1-2-18 had no clue how to track players ?

01-02-2018, 03:33 PM
#1
EVZStreaming
newbie

Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 27

Global Poker Newbies Question

Is there anyway to research our opponents to see if they are a winning player? Besides just taking notes on them.

Also any other data sites you recommend?

Good Game sir / Well played finding Shark scope/ Welcome to online poker

What is your opinion on the people who have been able to put together sick, large 4-digit or even 5-digit sharkscope graphs? Do you think they have been affected by the theoretical handicap system also?

Occam's Razor and all.

The biggest issue is, there is no logic as to how the software would determine one level to another and then adjust itself once a new category has been reached. Then, what happens if there is an unbalanced amount or so called rec/regs at a table?

Cubeia owns/created the software and it is also the same software used on Nitrogen. The big difference is Nitrogen doesn't have an unusually long list of players claiming riggie stuff and Global has an almost endless supply of FB players that do not have the foggiest idea how to play. Then add in the certification of the RNG and you now have a co-conspirator in an issue where it appears that AI is present on one network and not another that uses the exact same software package.

Anyone can have a theory and presenting it through an "Argument of Ignorance" provides no basis of proof nor construct. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I welcome Global Poker to investigate me, I am legit. The fact that you think I am cheating should show how paranoid you really are.

Mine isn't that large (yet), but I'm glad if I have been... In fact, I'd like to have even more skewed towards my favor for the last two weeks of the Grizzly Games!

I am not asking for proof nor would I suggest that someone has it. What I asked for is what I am getting . People who see the other side possibly more clearer then myself . What I do remember is the same discussion being talked about 10 years ago. How the sites would have no reason to cheat or no reason to have unimaginable things built into the software. How did that turn out? If thinking along the lines that what I propose is not possible I fail to see that statement . That's myself knowing that it is possible. As far as what or why it may or may not be something that would equal the playing field that's what I am attempting IN MY OWN MIND to contemplate.

As far as people having four and five figure graphs . I do believe I said that some would win more than others probably based on size of game. I am not claiming that anything I am discussing is real . I just still think its possible.

Thank You for your reply

I never said you where a cheater . What I said is I witnessed you soft play another player three handed . Possibly you should learn about the game of poker and what that means . By the way you replied in the chat that day when I called you out on it and by your obvious attempt to put me on blast in a couple threads you may not know what SOFT PLAY even is.

Either way I did what any normal person would do and contacted support about the tournament in question they did there due diligence and sent me a few things . Its not for me to decide who you are or what you do. But get things clear . I myself have not once come out and said you are doing anything wrong besides the experience I had with you which was not a good one . Not a good one in the fact that you did exactly what I have stated .

So once again talk with Global not me . I just gave them the info I had . Who knows what else you've been up to . But in the future its probably not best to call out people in forums that you are so obviously new to . Maybe you should put the time in to learn how not to think you are dealing with just some random new player who hasn't been around for 15 years and has seen guys like yourself come and go like a fart in the wind.

Okay. We will exclude net profit from the analysis.

What about the player’s whose sharkscope shows a steady increase over thousands of sit and goes played, without experiencing a significant downswing (who, surprisingly, are a lot of the same ones with a high net profit). Are THESE players excluded from the theoretical handicapping system that is holding winning players back from their earning potential?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I think About four and five figure graphs is that it could be based on the size of the games they are playing. In todays poker economy I would not say four and five figure is a whole lot of money in the scheme of things since the site has been open for over a year.

Would you not expect in more than a year that there would be a small percentage of full time regs that could have put together Six figure graphs? We all understand that people with an edge on the field will always make a profit. That's what makes this game great.

I have looked at 1000,s of graphs over the past few months and there is one trend that seems undeniable . A majority of the players I look up are either up a very small amount or down a very small amount . I have only found a few players who are down what I would see as a big amount . That number still stays under 20k . So am I to believe that Global has amassed the largest field of break even players ever?

Look I don't know what the problem is and once again I am here to find out what others think on both sides.


Thanks

Sharkscope has only been tracking on GP since September 2017 (I think), so only a 5 month or so period. Profit Seems to irrelevant in the discussion that you want to be having, though, since you are basically focusing on players not winning as much as they should due to a “handicap system”. By that theory, someone that was crushing $3 SnG’s should be hindered by this handicap system, despite not having a large net profit number. So we will leave net profit out of it.


I don’t think anyone will dispute you on this paragraph. I’m not quite sure what point it makes, but I suppose everything is true.



Is this a fact or an exaggeration? If this is a fact, then your time might be better spent by studying poker strategies.



Is this different then any of the other sites? My understanding of the general online poker ecosystem is that most players are either losing at a small rate or hovering around breakeven, while some players are winning at a large rate, and other players are losing at a larger rate.

If you are speculating that this category of players at GP is larger than at other sites (and by such a large amount that it is statistically significant), I would assume this would be a pretty in-depth analysis needed to prove. I assume it would be something like analyzing the ROIs of EVERY player who has played on global Poker, and then comparing it to the same analysis on other sites.

I imagine this would be a lot of work.


Wait, I thought that net profit didn’t matter right? Similarly to having a handful of regular players being able to run up sharkscope net profit balances, there should also be a few players who are losing a lot, right?


While I hear you, it appears there are a LOT more people on the other side than on your side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk