Hello, I have been pulling information off my PokerStars hand histories to try and make light of some oddities I’ve been seeing. I am supplying this information because I'm trying to see if others have a bigger dataset to compare with.

To give you some background I am a micro no-limit tournament recreational player who's been playing on Stars since 05, not really winning too much, no really loosing too much. I've always heard and have read stories about how PokerStars doles out incredible beats and scenarios. For myself I have seen amazing things happen on Stars and over the long run I’ve contributed it to simple probability. However back in March or so, I started noticing mine and others all-in preflop hands making full houses abundantly. I kept that in the back of my mind and shrugged it off as mere short term statistical swings. In April I started keeping my hand histories and have been dumping them into a database.

Having approximately 6 thousand hands collected I pulled all the times I was all-in preflop, and to my suspicion I made a large portion of full houses. So I did a bit of research to get a better understanding to what I was seeing. Holding a pocket pair, compared to non-pocket pairs, the likelihood of making a full house dramatically increases. This is against a single opponent holding any two random cards and seeing board to the river. The likelihood goes from 2.6% to 8.5%. I determined this by running the software from ajsimulationsoftware.com, selecting a couple of pairs, and running the simulation 10 million times on each pair.

By only looking at hands where both parties are all in preflop eliminates any kind of skewing which one might find if there’s action after the flop. It also doesn’t matter what the pocket pairs are, aces or deuces, the percentages are the same. The only difference I observed was when it came to pocket fives, and tens. Those hands increased your likelihood of making straights which are of no or little bearing on full houses.

Going back to my hand histories I weeded out the times when I only held pocket pairs. The figure was even larger than expected. I had 34 showdowns all-in preflop where I held a pocket pair, and 9 of them turned into a full house. That’s 26.5% a far cry from 8.5%. So it was obvious that my sample size was way too small to adjust for swings of luck. So I went and pulled observed hands, where two others faced off in a showdown and at least one of them held a pocket pair. I found 165 more hands and adding the 34 I already had made my sample to be just under 200 hands.

The findings are in the chart below. The first column are the odds from the simulation software, these are the percentages that come from a 10 million hand sample, pocket pair verses any two random cards. Second are the hands from my sample, third are those odds, and forth is the difference from normal.

(PR=Pair, TP=Two Pair, TK=Three of a Kind, etc, etc.)

Statics Hands Odds Difference
---------------------------------------------------
PR =36.00% PR=66 33.33% -0.08
TP =39.50% TP=65 32.82% -0.17
TK =11.80% TK=30 15.15% +0.28
ST =01.20% ST=4 2% -0.18
FL =01.95% FL=4 2% -0.18
FH =08.50% FH=29 14.64% +0.72
FK =00.84% FK=1 0.5% -0.31

So from this one can see that all hands which did not make three of a kind or a full house are close the normal statistic. The other two seem abnormal. One is about 1/3 more likely to hit a full house, again, when one holds a pair and they are all in preflop. It was interesting for me to find out that the number of three of a kinds that were made was also high. This data further reconfirmed what I was seeing. However, others might say, “Who the hell cares if the stats are off slightly, the sample is still too small”. Well if others have a bigger sample and could collaborate this, it could shed some light on how Stars random generator is working.

I’m not saying there’s cheating going on here, but maybe there is something to the bad beat stories. It may be a computation that has been over looked somewhere, somehow, in which in the long run may contribute to the hands overall.

wow another one

Edit: Of my hands that were not folded, 5% made a full house, which should be pretty close to expected. You're just running good at full houses. This is over 60k hands at Stars.

OP, they are discussing this very issue here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...d.php?t=256926

can we just ip ban these people from now on please?

Your probably just looking at random hands all in PF, in that case it should only be 2.6%. Your twice above normal.

When you can back these stats with 6 million hands let me know and ill read the rest of the op

This is exactly why people like "mookman" should not be running around like lunatics telling anyone and everyone about the UB/AP scandal.

We've had more than double the amount of ZOMG RIGGED posts since the new information regarding the UB scandal came to light.

Please I never said anything about it being rigged.

So what you're saying is I should be shoving all my PP pre-flop?

OMG no, this post has nothing to do with winners or looser. It has to do with accuracy in numbers. So please don't read more into this than necessary.

OK then ZOMG CURIOUSAMENTS

"Holding a pocket pair, compared to non-pocket pairs, the likelihood of making a full house dramatically increases"


Geraldo thinks this is shocking!!!!!!!!!!

I would imagine river.king didn't do so well in his junior high science fair.

[ ] Curious Stars Statistics

lol wow 6000 hands that must have taken like 4 years to gather

Also shocking that most people going all in are holding pocket pairs and not 2 7 off suit.

Yep, it certainly seems to have brought out the rigtards this month and not just here - there have been posts in the Software forum and the STT forum too.

Juk

stopped reading here. this is <5 hours for me.

I love how OP is trying so hard to conceal the real question he is asking. The statistical evidence(I feel wrong for even calling it that) says nothing at all!
Cmon dude, I know you read the other "rigged" threads and saw the bashing those idiots received , yet you still pursue somehow thinking your question or should I say accusation is based on fact.

Heres what you want to hear:
Wow amazing revelation, I cant belive someone is finally smart enough to substantiate that online poker is rigged. I cant believe I was such an idiot for all these years. Thank god a person replete with unparalled statistical wisdom rescued the thousands of us that thought we could actually win. I think ill move to something where I have a bigger edge, perhaps I will sharpen my slot skills. That is of course, if those arent rigged also, please enlighten me with info!!?!!!