So are you saying play money uses a different RNG or what? I'm not totally sure what your point here is.

On every single pocket pair besides AA KK? Where we are only expected to see them in X amount of hands? I understand we can see this 60+ percent of the time on every single flop, but a randy sample of PP's with 18/20 of the observed above holding suited face cards, also, some holding multiple FC's.

I understand this a horrendously small sample, and its prob. not set up to you guys math wizard standards. Look, obviously this wont prove rigged, and this is not even the angle to approach it.

So all you aholes can have an additional laugh, K8 was in on #2379.

Please don't be let down by this rigtarded example, I have much, much more.

They will never get,like they say you can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink.Just think of it like this.I am driving down the road about 70 miles an hour,I look down and my speedometer says I'm doing 8 miles an hour,in my head do I say prove it! No I know the difference between 8 miles an hour and 70 miles an hour. Case closed!! If you don't have enough live hours to tell the difference I cant help...The numbers don't matter because there are ways around that..

If anything in poker occurred 9 times more or less than expectation, everyone would know the difference, and there would be no question something was wrong. Do you have stats, or was that just a ridiculous exaggeration? (that's a rhetorical question btw)

Huh? I had to look at your post history to figure out if you were agreeing with K13 or not. I see that you must be agreeing with him and assume that you are saying if it seems like the RNG is off, it must be, whatever the actual statistics say.

So if it seems to you that As flop more often, it must be that despite the collected evidence to the contrary.

Even if an RNG is rigged, they are unlikely to do it to the 70:8 ratio you used above. Many many people would pick up on that. Even the 10% skew people are talking about would be exceptionally difficult to pick up without keeping actual track.

These numbers you're talking about presumably are the actual results that have been collected and are being used by various people studying the issue, or that show up in a person's database: while you can perhaps accuse people of misusing the numbers, or lying about them, then I don't know what ways around the numbers you are talking about.

This is the worst analogy I've seen in a long time. How does someone like this function in society?

I am a little surprised at the level of discussion in this thread. I spent the last few days working on my final paper for my stats class and found some interesting results.

try this math in your database

proportion of all same suit flops = p2 (in your sample) for instance 35/250 success/n

p1=.0517 true probability (52/52)(12/51)(11/50) as an observer disregarding all hole cards as unseen

my p2 was .039036

then

n = sample size

sqrt(p1(1-p1))/(n)) = standard deviation, (yes one of many formulas)

now

(p2-p1)/(standard deviation) = z (This is how many standard deviations)

2P(Z>=|z|)

I had n = 52,800 ( yes that is a very large sample samples under 20 are accpetable for this test)
z=13 (yes thats 13 standard deviations from mean)

and a probabilty of 99.999% to reject the hypothesis that p2 is anywhere near possible

The same suit flop scenerio is an easy one to calculate, but i have many more.

Do you mean the people you work with in the Pokerstars office?

Yea sure, but cmon, there are so many ways programming can adjust that your numbers may look just fine, but you could still be getting cheated. Does a site like Pokerstars provide a report that shows how many times you took a horrible beat right before cashing or final tabling? Another thing I want to turn around on the online pokersite trolls when they get into these message boards and say "Prove it" is, NO, YOU provide a totally transparent system of regulating your online pokersite so that everyone who spends their money there has more confidence that you are providing a fair game for all.

The burden of proof should be on the site, not the individual customer who is feeling like they are being cheated. There are a lot of people who think something is amiss on sites like Pokerstars, but they dont have any real power to do anything about it except spool through tons of data that is really not going to detect a sophisticated system skimming a player up to the line of detection. I just cant believe that anyone depositing their money is stupid enough to just automatically assume that everything is on the up and up.

Ok pokersite trolls, have at it...

The fact that you think a sample under 20 is acceptable for testing whether something has a probability of success of 0.05 leads me to believe you have no idea what you are talking about. You realise the expected number would be less than 1 for less than 20 trials? How did you get a proportion of 0.39036 out of 52,800 trials anyway? 2061 successes would be 0.39034, 2062 successes would be 0.039053. You need to be more careful when you make numbers up, read some of the other rigtard posts and see how they keep them as vague as possible.

I have seen a test done on this statistic somewhere before and the numbers were close to expeced. Spadebidder can you post the data from your 1.3 million hand sample on this if you have it?

poker is a large business we have software developers, affilates, TV shows, winning players. Who should tell you nits rigged for 2-3 BB / 100 ?

Noone of them will scare away new players or need a big scandal, its relative
hard to rigg without being detected. Here and there a 2 outer for the new player and here and there a few created actiongames like FH via FH, set via set. Flopped nuts via 2 monsterdraws.thats the way they rigg the games.

But poker is still beatable, for small stakes its far away from 2003-2006.
2003-2006 you pay no rake after RB / Bonus, today you pay after RB / Bonus
2-4 BB / 100.

For the most slightly-medium winning players in 2004 its waste of time to play these days.

My netwinrate is down from 5,6BB to 1,4BB...not worth the time and i reduced my play 90% added its not legal here since 1.1.2009 and we may see a pokerstars.de site soon ( germany like in italy ).

Good that there are legal and profitable games like the stock markets.
I made more there with lesser work.

Good

I don't take anything at face value, I've dealt with too many women in my life to make that mistake.


My only hope is to oust them on the fact that some situations are fabricated in MTTs to ensure time constraints and proper turnover. If it is indeed happening there has to be evidence somewhere. Crime w/o trail is a hard thing to accomplish. And i got nothing but time.



LMFAO. I just remembered something. Every time I think of the Stars RNG i see that eye computer from the movie 'Eagle Eye' spying in and putting the screws to everyone at just the right moment.

You must mean this one, it has 1.3 million flops seen. T-test tells you how many std. deviations the sample mean differs from the population mean (expected), basically the same as the Z test for samples this size.

I'd like to see smcdonn2's sample.


This is just a snippet of the community card test suite I'm working on (in addition to the hole card stuff). When finished it will be run on the billion hand database. Incidentally, the highest negative variance line above is explained by a card removal effect, and the other one over 2 is simply a small outlier that means nothing (not that SD 2 means much in this sample size). I have tests for turns and rivers too, and more flop stuff not ready.

[QUOTE=BlisterXists;12219262]I don't take anything at face value, I've dealt with too many women in my life to make that mistake.


LOL! So true. Although mine has been a good girl for 6 years, so I hope that doesnt change...

Speaking of which, mine thinks that Pstars is so obviously rigged. When she see's a player make a horrible call for a very significant amount of their chips when they are drawing almost dead and they bust me out of a tournament on the river that I am very deep in, she just rolls her eyes. She is a good poker player and will never trust online sites like these because she has seen how frequently these kinds of things happen. We just laugh, because for two very intelligent people it is so obvious without going through the hand histories. It is so bad that it is also insulting.

I think sites should provide easy to use tools so that you can audit your work by the minute, keep the data on your computer and be able to look at a lot of different angles including things like "All in with an 80/20 or more advantage near the money or the final table". This would give a player who doesnt have the time or energy to spool through loads of hand histories only to figure out that they are going to need a degree in mathematics to find out if things are on the up a chance to understand what is really going on.

Good luck and good hunting on your project. I for one would be very interested in your results. I have played enough hands on Stars to see something doesnt seem right. Whether that be my own selective memory bias (doubtfully), poor programming or whether it be fraud. It would be very helpful to know what we are dealing with because nothing the pokersites are doing amounts to enough transparency to give a player with questions about all of this enough information to feel safe. That is my opinion, I hope it is worth at least a nickel...

Here's an absolute gem, the epitome of what stars does to you after hours of play with no remorse, time and time again. I was fairly deep in the money and caught a beat a few hands before that knocked me down. I know the setup is coming to finish me off. I know its impossible to lay down a big pair with 5bb, they know that too........... I don't need many chips to get by, but its nearly always the same story.









Poker Stars USD No Limit Hold'em Tournament - t500/t1000 Blinds + t100 - 9 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

BB: t29339 M = 12.22
UTG: t33773 M = 14.07
UTG+1: t62623 M = 26.09
UTG+2: t12477 M = 5.20
MP1: t9723 M = 4.05
MP2: t3160 M = 1.32
CO: t25286 M = 10.54
Hero (BTN): t4305 M = 1.79
SB: t6805 M = 2.84

Pre Flop: (t2400) Hero is BTN with A A
2 folds, UTG+2 calls t1000, 2 folds, CO raises to t4300, Hero calls t4205 all in, 3 folds

Flop: (t11810) 9 T K (2 players - 1 is all in)

Turn: (t11810) K (2 players - 1 is all in)

River: (t11810) J (2 players - 1 is all in)

Well in reality i used .039036 andv .0517614. I notice the hands you posted and they look right no debate there. Do you find nothing interesting aboout my sample? I mean in all reality why be so quick to bash. I ran the test for significance, which is a legit test, and found that my HH was off. Instead of bashing why not try to explain the fact that my hh was 13 sd off of the mean. I am glad yours wasnt.

Also i would be hapy to post my smple, but i dont know how to put in the form you have, I use HM. I used a filter of same suit flops and divided it by total hands.

Have not posted in a while because it is kind of getting stale, with too many gimmick accounts and bad beat whiners. Not a lot of new, exciting theories for the riggedologist movement the past few weeks.

Still, may as well toss in a simple question or two about this one since it seems to require a ton of rigged theories to pull off, many of which contradict themselves.


OK, so you are deep in the money, so clearly it was not rigged against you to prevent you from making the money (a common rigged theory).

You suffered a few beats before this hand yet were still in it which means you had the higher stack at the time. Most riggedologists believe the software is rigged to help the higher stack so it was not in that case I suppose.

Now you get AA and lose to QQ and assume that is because it was rigged against you. Is that because now you are the smaller stack? If so why did you not win when you were the bigger stacks before. Do you think the QQ opponent played badly (ie: rigged for bad players)? Which rigged theory applies here?

Or, do you simply believe that any time you do not win a MTT that it is because it is all rigged against YOU in some masterful scheme? Why are YOU that important for them to set up these elaborate methods of letting you cash but not win? What is their motivation for doing this to YOU? How many of the participants in the tournament are also secretly being manipulated in this way, or is it just YOU?

Basically I am wondering what rigged theory you are even proposing exists here. Is the world out to get YOU? That seems the only one that may apply, but all that means is you are paranoid - yawn.

Or are you just whining about a bad beat? There is a forum for people who want to do that though no one will really care about your very routine, unspectacular bad beat of a 4-1 spot when you had about 3 blinds left. Also, that K guy already has the monopoly on pointless whining in this thread so you are not even charting new territory if that is your goal.

Note, I am not even asking you to prove anything (as you can not and proof is not what matters to guys like you). All I am asking is what are you even suggesting is in place against you here? What rigged theories are at work?

All the best.

I used n= 52822

p^ = 2062/52822=.039036765

Can you come up with something better than accusing of making things up?

Such as? You can't prove a negative. What kind of skimming are we talking about here? I'm sure somebody could come up with a way of detecting it.

So you're going with the "short stacks lose to big stacks to speed up tournies" theory? When you posted this hand:

You made it pretty clear that it was because they chose your account to help donks out in tournies. So is it big stacks always win, some accounts are chosen to lose to bad players, both, or are these just some components of their evil, evil plan?


What does she do when she see's[sic] a player make a horrible call for a very significant amount of their chips when they're drawing almost dead and then your hand holds? I'm guessing she either ignores it completely or says something snarky like "Oh, looks like they messed up and let you win one" right? Yep, you two are so intelligent you make computers look stupid. Examining millions of hand histories? That's for idiots, you guys can simply remember the times you lost a 95/5 and hold it up as 100% proof of rigging. If they're rigging it, what makes you think these auditing tools wouldn't go along with it? And "All in with an 80/20 near the money or the final table" is a meaningless statistic for casual players, because it's not like if it happens 5 times you're supposed to have won 4 of them. You'd have to have had a few hundred 80/20 all ins near the money or final table before the numbers evened out and got close to 80/20 overall.

I don't think I expressed any opinion on your sample, other than saying I'd like to see it. Why don't you just export all your flops to an excel or text file (flop cards only) and upload it somewhere, so we can look at it. This needs to be ALL flops in your database, not just ones you were in.

Still think a 20 hand sample is enough to test something with an expected probability of 0.05 or have you changed your mind on that?

BTW, you are making your statistics up but if it amuses you then go for it !

I want to try this in my HEM database but I can't find the filter 'flop was dealt'. Where is it?
Edit - I did it using 'Flop Pot Size greater than 0 bbs'. Isn't there any sensible way of doing it?

15865 flops in my pathetically small database.
824 monotone flops
0.0519 - not very many s.d. but can't be bothered to work it out.

go to cash games>>hands>>edit>>then select 3,4,5 flush options on the flop. then view all

I didn't understand that at all. Can you post it step by step - want to make sure we are doing the same thing.

Here's what I did so you can try with your database:

My database starts with 20820 hands showing.

Cash Games -> Report -> Filter -> Edit -> More Filters -> Flop Filters -> Flop Pot Size in BBs is bigger than -> Click 'add this filter' -> Enter '0' if it isn't already entered -> Hit 'OK'.

My database now has 15865 hands showing, these are all the hands where a flop was dealt.

Then go back into Filter -> Edit -> Board Texture -> Filter by Flop Texture -> Filter by flush cards -> All three one suit.

I have 824 monotone flops, a proportion of 0.0519 (seems like it must be less than 1 s.d. away from expected).