Just went through my sharkscope history I played one winning player today all day. Lost 12 all ins where I was a 2-1 favorite or better starting tommorow im gonna start posting HH's so you guys dont think im crazy. On the other hand Ignition is going well as it always has dunno why I bother with Globals BS just can understand how guys with double digit negative ROIs in sit and goes are breaking even vs me for 800 games. I would be willing to bet less then 10% of my games in that 800 game span is against players with winning ROIs.

You have played across 3 buyin levels during that sample. Run a sim in primedope variance calc. You're like 15-20% to have an 800 game breakeven or losing stretch with a 7% ROI at each buyin level. Playing across multiple buyin levels increases variance a lot.

Yea it’s crazy I suppose maybe I can post hh’s to get some insight on any leaks I might have.

Probability calculation expressed as "2-1" is a simplification of what underneath is a continuous normal distribution (aka Gaussian distribution) of events where any outcome occurs with a certain frequency. The mean of this distribution can be expressed as a ratio, like "2-1", or probability X%, but such expression does not describe the underlying distribution. Gaussian distribution is described by its mean, standard deviation and skewness, in different in-game scenarios these parameters will be different due to specific card distribution that occurs during each specific hand (i.e. which cards have been burnt/folded/dealt). For such observations, when in-game situations are similar like "flips", a Bernoulli distribution can be used to record each empirical data point as 1 and 0 in samples of 10s or 100s, for example, take 10 identical preflop flips ie pocket pair vs 2 overs and record how many you win and mark X axis at that value, take another set of 10 same flips and do it again, if the X value repeats make a mark above the previous mark. If you do this hundreds and thousands of times, you will get a Gaussian distribution with a mean and standard deviation after Z number of observations which can be simplified as a ratio or probability X%. That does not mean that X% after Z number of observations converged to its true mean, but one could say that a pocket pair vs 2 overs is likely to win X% of the time with standard deviation of sigma%.

Cheers,
rollinas

I feel stupid now.

You and me both

Just started grinding todays heres 3 good ones for you guys nothing to see here "standard variance" at global. I should be able to post between 30-40 of these bad beats per day.



https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163dc3d

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163dc8b

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163dc8e

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163dc9f

Please do not post 30-40 of these a day. That is a lot of energy wasted since I am guessing only a handful of people will actually click on them.

Instead, I would like you to take a month off poker. Come back fresh and with a clear mind. I am willing to bet that your results will improve significantly.

why would i take a break unless im playing bad? thats the reason to post the HH's to see if its leaks or if its just variance.

just loaded another one up heres how it ended more standard variance.

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163ddf0

damn software crashed or i had another one to show my JJ vs J10 all in J10 wins lol. more standard variance.

Very first hand of the day on global here ya go.

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163e2cf

3rd game

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...df4a000163e2de

In a couple months I've played maybe 75k +- hands in sit n gos and cash games. It seemed pretty standard at first but I'm starting to notice that solid players are running mega below ev. Me and opponents. It really does seem that the underdog hand is far more likely to win on Global. More than the inverse of the real probability. It is a problem for sure.

No way to prove it, and no way to trust those who have "tested" the RNG, whoever they are and whatever that entails.

Global does not allow databases or trackers so there's no way to do a real statistical analysis. There may be a reason for this.

If you play online poker, consider it entertainment and that you're probably getting cheated somehow. Whether it be collusion, bots, house players, continued funky results, etc.

It's sad to say but as a US player in 2022, the only way to really know you're getting a fair game is to play live games with real cards.

I try to play deep SPRs and never, EVER get money all in before the river. Just destroy them post flop. The player pool is pretty bad so this has made up for most of my AI losses. This site is just practice. If you're looking at a game that you have reason to believe is rigged, the only smart play is not to play.

Ive been running bad since I did a cash out, but I don't think it's rigged. I will say the river does seem to hit a hell of a lot though. I just got 1-outered, set of aces and of course a set of ducks hit quads on the river after getting all the chips in on the Turn.

Well, and here's a real question from a GP fan and pretty serious low stakes player on the site (and sometimes winner) since 2017. You think there might be a reason this wide open to US players site is stuck traffic wise for pretty much that entire time? Why tons more of serious online players haven't moved over to a site with easy deposits, easy cashouts, free sweeps, and a generally really weak player pool? Call it real, fake, perception, paranoia, whatever you want, but there's a serious RNG credibility problem for the brand that extends beyond the normal riggie sentiment. It's not because Cousin Fred lost a few nights in a row in the nightly 11 cent bonanza and takes to the forum to bitch about it, but because serious players who have won for years or decades think they smell a rat.

Don't shoot the messenger.

I’m not arguing about the RNG one way or another but I’ve been stating your main point for a while. Regulated sites that only serve like 4 or 5 states have the same if not more traffic. Global supposedly covers most of the US and Canada. Something just doesn’t add up with the traffic. I’ve thought this was odd for a while now. Global seems to market pretty well on social media too. Maybe someone here has more insight. Really fishy imo

i think its mostly that a lot of people are just turned off by the sweepstakes model, even though theyve probably never even looked into it or understand it. Ive had iggy players insult me for playing on global. They just see the word sweepstakes and equate it to zynga or something.

Most poker players that have played on unregulated sites are able to adapt quickly to whatever a site throws their way especially when it comes to receiving or sending funds. Good example would be when crypto came along. I don’t think the sweeps model would impact that at all. I do see people trashing Global for the guarantees…I’m guilty of that myself. That all coincides with the traffic though. Whatever the reason, they don’t seem to be growing. In theory it should be much larger with the market they cover

LOL. Another day at the office.

https://play.globalpoker.com/hand/62...02a500010b903a

aww you poor thing

Hard to imagine someone posting this. If you are going to limp on the button with KK, what are you expecting to happen?

LOL at your comment and yeah I always limp cause you saw one replay I posted.

If you post a 20bb button open-limp w KK with zero context, you should expect some trolling Of course it can be best in unique conditions. I'd guess 9 out of 10 times guys do this it's not the right conditions though.

To induce a shove from Queen-rag is a good condition.

I gotta agree that slowplaying on this site is lighting money on fire. The player pool generally DOES NOT FOLD. In most games there is no such thing as non-showdown pots.

On global, fastplaying is the new slowplaying. You could turn a top 1% hand face up and somebody (or 3-4 other players in a ring game) will smash jam any cards at all. Then again, the results for players doing this are pretty insane. Maybe they're figuring out the wacky algorithm