The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition - Page 340 - Internet Poker

I've created two similar tests but they are more rigorous in testing wins vs. expectation and the distribution of the community cards than what is described. I've had to work through some of the issues mentioned by 2p2member. I'm still perfecting the code but once I have something ready to publish then various ways to slice and dice the data will be easy. I've already added a comparison by stakes and I plan to do one by stack sizes too.

Quote

09-13-2009 , 08:15 PM

#8477

BucketFoot

grinder

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 500

When I win it feels rigged.
When I lose it feels rigged.
My guess is it's rigged

Quote

09-13-2009 , 08:32 PM

#8478

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucketFoot

When I win it feels rigged.
When I lose it feels rigged.
My guess is it's rigged

Thanks for clearing that up, your past posts were a bit vague.

Quote

09-13-2009 , 09:32 PM

#8479

NooooBingo

grinder

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 626

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucketFoot

When I win it feels rigged.
When I lose it feels rigged.
My guess is it's rigged

Wow, your evidence and thought process are overwhelming. Well done sir.

Quote

09-13-2009 , 09:34 PM

#8480

NooooBingo

grinder

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 626

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

I'm still working on the code and the testing. We only recently got 600 million hands in a ready state to run reports on (in a special database that is a manageable size and runs fast).

To give you an idea of the scale and the logistical issues to analyse a sample of this size, checking for and analysing only 2-way preflop all-in hands (which happen at about 1/135 at full ring cash) takes a decent personal computer about 24 hours per ~200 million hands, or three days continuous 100% CPU computer time to do the whole thing. I even had to set up special cooling apparatus for my computer to do it. Obviously I do my troubleshooting on smaller sets, but it takes many hours of computer time. So before doing the full run I need to be sure it is correct. And that's just one of the analyses I'm working on. And I have a real job too that won't let me work on fun poker stuff all the time.

I'll have something in the next few weeks.

Thank you for doing this. You're doing the poker community a great service.

Unfortunately when you do publish your results which will undoubtedly show everything is kosher, the rigtards will start to question your credibility and find new baseless arguments as to why online poker is rigged. Such is life.

Quote

09-13-2009 , 11:17 PM

#8481

spadebidder

Actually Shows Proof

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,905

Quote:

Originally Posted by NooooBingo

I'm not doing it for them. (and thanks for the compliment)

Here's a teaser that people can chew on. Full results won't be posted in this thread - I'll probably have to put it on a web site where I can use full pages - but here's a small sample of around 1 million hands just to show some of the stuff I'm working on.

First the all-in study. Even in this small sample notice it's a normal distribution (technically it isn't but I'm using the word generically). The standard deviations of the bins here are from a T-test using
( (act - p) / Math.sqrt( ((p*q)-(T/4.0)) / n ));

The 5% confidence level is 1.96 (just like a Z distribution) for all bins with at least 120 hands in them, slightly larger with fewer hands.

Code:

PREFLOP HEADS-UP ALL-IN ANALYSIS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site #0, 9 to 10 players, NL Hold'em, all stakes combined
Using 25 equity bins.
Number of hands analysed: 1116569
Preflop heads-up all-ins: 7500 (Once per 149 hands).

FAVORITE'S
Preflop equity  ExpW% ExpT%/2  TotExp    Hands    ActW% ActT%/2  TotAct  StdDev

[0.98 - 1.00]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   
[0.96 - 0.98]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   
[0.94 - 0.96]  93.37%   0.71%  94.08%        1    0.00%   0.00%   0.00%   
[0.92 - 0.94]  92.39%   0.67%  93.05%      182   95.05%   0.27%  95.33%    1.24
[0.90 - 0.92]  90.69%   0.66%  91.36%       25   92.00%   0.00%  92.00%    0.12
[0.88 - 0.90]  88.04%   0.57%  88.60%       16   93.75%   0.00%  93.75%    0.66
[0.86 - 0.88]  86.76%   0.49%  87.25%      149   82.55%   0.34%  82.89%   -1.62
[0.84 - 0.86]  84.68%   0.28%  84.96%       52   90.38%   0.00%  90.38%    1.10
[0.82 - 0.84]  82.31%   0.30%  82.61%      251   80.88%   0.80%  81.67%   -0.39
[0.80 - 0.82]  81.08%   0.23%  81.31%     1448   82.94%   0.28%  83.22%    1.87
[0.78 - 0.80]  79.00%   0.20%  79.20%       53   79.25%   0.00%  79.25%    0.01
[0.76 - 0.78]  76.04%   0.63%  76.66%       14   85.71%   0.00%  85.71%    0.81
[0.74 - 0.76]  72.74%   1.95%  74.70%      359   72.14%   3.62%  75.77%    0.48
[0.72 - 0.74]  71.02%   2.01%  73.03%      396   69.70%   4.17%  73.86%    0.38
[0.70 - 0.72]  70.10%   0.99%  71.09%      525   68.95%   1.43%  70.38%   -0.36
[0.68 - 0.70]  67.82%   1.30%  69.12%      533   66.79%   2.35%  69.14%    0.01
[0.66 - 0.68]  66.32%   0.94%  67.26%      290   63.79%   0.86%  64.66%   -0.96
[0.64 - 0.66]  64.41%   0.68%  65.09%      273   67.77%   0.73%  68.50%    1.19
[0.62 - 0.64]  62.30%   0.64%  62.94%      192   63.54%   0.78%  64.32%    0.40
[0.60 - 0.62]  60.18%   0.76%  60.94%      190   57.37%   1.32%  58.68%   -0.64
[0.58 - 0.60]  58.52%   0.60%  59.12%      142   55.63%   1.06%  56.69%   -0.59
[0.56 - 0.58]  56.49%   0.36%  56.85%      688   56.40%   0.65%  57.05%    0.10
[0.54 - 0.56]  54.58%   0.29%  54.87%      564   50.00%   0.62%  50.62%   -2.03 *
[0.52 - 0.54]  42.98%  10.06%  53.04%      583   41.51%  10.03%  51.54%   -0.81
[0.50 - 0.52]  29.32%  21.41%  50.74%      327   30.89%  20.18%  51.07%    0.16

[    ALL    ]  66.35%   2.41%  68.76%     7253   65.97%   2.74%  68.72%   -0.08

* With 22 valid bins, expected deviations > 5% signif = 1.10.  Observed = 1
Chi-Sq for Fav =  6.01 w/ 22 DF. Crit nums (.10 .05 .01) 30.81   33.92   40.29


UNDERDOG'S
Preflop equity  ExpW% ExpT%/2  TotExp    Hands    ActW% ActT%/2  TotAct  StdDev

[0.48 - 0.50]  27.85%  21.41%  49.26%      327   28.75%  20.18%  48.93%   -0.16
[0.46 - 0.48]  36.90%  10.06%  46.96%      583   38.42%  10.03%  48.46%    0.81
[0.44 - 0.46]  44.84%   0.29%  45.13%      564   48.76%   0.62%  49.38%    2.03 *
[0.42 - 0.44]  42.78%   0.36%  43.15%      688   42.30%   0.65%  42.95%   -0.10
[0.40 - 0.42]  40.28%   0.60%  40.88%      142   42.25%   1.06%  43.31%    0.59
[0.38 - 0.40]  38.30%   0.76%  39.06%      190   40.00%   1.32%  41.32%    0.64
[0.36 - 0.38]  36.43%   0.64%  37.06%      192   34.90%   0.78%  35.68%   -0.40
[0.34 - 0.36]  34.24%   0.68%  34.91%      273   30.77%   0.73%  31.50%   -1.19
[0.32 - 0.34]  31.80%   0.94%  32.74%      290   34.48%   0.86%  35.34%    0.96
[0.30 - 0.32]  29.58%   1.30%  30.88%      533   28.52%   2.35%  30.86%   -0.01
[0.28 - 0.30]  27.91%   0.99%  28.91%      525   28.19%   1.43%  29.62%    0.36
[0.26 - 0.28]  24.96%   2.01%  26.97%      396   21.97%   4.17%  26.14%   -0.38
[0.24 - 0.26]  23.35%   1.95%  25.30%      359   20.61%   3.62%  24.23%   -0.48
[0.22 - 0.24]  22.71%   0.63%  23.34%       14   14.29%   0.00%  14.29%   -0.81
[0.20 - 0.22]  20.60%   0.20%  20.80%       53   20.75%   0.00%  20.75%   -0.01
[0.18 - 0.20]  18.46%   0.23%  18.69%     1448   16.51%   0.28%  16.78%   -1.87
[0.16 - 0.18]  17.10%   0.30%  17.39%      251   17.53%   0.80%  18.33%    0.39
[0.14 - 0.16]  14.76%   0.28%  15.04%       52    9.62%   0.00%   9.62%   -1.10
[0.12 - 0.14]  12.26%   0.49%  12.75%      149   16.78%   0.34%  17.11%    1.62
[0.10 - 0.12]  10.83%   0.57%  11.40%       16    6.25%   0.00%   6.25%   -0.66
[0.08 - 0.10]   7.98%   0.66%   8.64%       25    8.00%   0.00%   8.00%   -0.12
[0.06 - 0.08]   6.28%   0.67%   6.95%      182    4.40%   0.27%   4.67%   -1.24
[0.04 - 0.06]   5.21%   0.71%   5.92%        1  100.00%   0.00% 100.00%    
[0.02 - 0.04]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   
[0.00 - 0.02]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   

[    ALL    ]  28.83%   2.41%  31.24%     7253   28.54%   2.74%  31.28%    0.08

* With 22 valid bins, expected deviations > 5% signif = 1.10.  Observed = 1
Chi-Sq for Dog = 13.35 w/ 21 DF. Crit nums (.10 .05 .01) 29.62   32.67   38.93


NO FAVORITE HANDS
Preflop equity  ExpW% ExpT%/2  TotExp    Hands    ActW% ActT%/2  TotAct  StdDev

[half of 5050]   5.81%  47.10%  50.00%      247   6.48%   46.76%  50.00%    NA

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and here's some of the community card study. Check out all the action flops going on there.

Code:

BOARD CARD ANALYSIS

Site #0, 9 to 10 players, NL Hold'em cash
Number of hands analysed:  1000214
              Flops seen:   601129 (60.1%)
              Turns seen:   382497 (38.2%)
             Rivers seen:   287232 (28.7%)

-----------------------------------------------------------
[ FLOP TYPE ]            Expected    Actual StdDev  Example

[ Rainbow              ]  39.765%   39.803%   0.78  2d-6s-Th
[ Two-suited           ]  55.059%   55.044%  -0.30  9d-3c-Qc
[ Single-suited        ]   5.176%    5.153%  -1.06  7s-4s-5s
[ -check suit types    ] 100.000%  100.000%   

[ Paired flop          ]  16.941%   16.980%   1.03  Ks-5c-5h
[ Triplet flop         ]   0.235%    0.236%   0.08  Jh-Js-Jd
[ Unpaired flop        ]  82.824%   82.785%  -1.03  9d-3c-Qc
[ -check match types   ] 100.000%  100.000%   

[ Pair & connector     ]   2.824%    2.850%   1.57  Ks-Qs-Qc
[ Pair & 1-gap         ]   2.606%    2.617%   0.68  Ks-Jd-Js
[ Pair & 2-gap+        ]  11.511%   11.513%   0.05  Ks-5c-5h
[ Triplets             ]   0.235%    0.236%   0.08  Jh-Js-Jd
[ 3-Straight           ]   3.475%    3.448%  -1.49  Qs-Jd-Kc
[ Connector & 1-gap    ]   6.950%    6.916%  -1.33  3h-Ad-4h
[ Connector & 2-gap+   ]  26.932%   26.960%   0.62  Tc-9h-Ks
[ KA2 double connector ]   0.290%    0.282%  -1.41  2h-Ac-Kd *
[ Double gutshot       ]   3.186%    3.199%   0.78  As-3d-Qh
[ Other 1-gaps         ]  21.430%   21.412%  -0.45  6c-8h-Qc
[ No cnct no 1-gp no pr]  20.561%   20.568%   0.18  9d-3c-Qc
[ -check connect types ] 100.000%  100.000%   

* Broadway card flops like AKx should normally be slightly 
  low due to the known card removal effect of more flops 
  being seen when players hold high cards.  

--Selected combo types--  
[ 3-Straight-Flush     ]   0.217%    0.209%  -1.76  8s-7s-6s
[ Unpaired rainbow     ]  31.059%   31.057%  -0.04  2d-6s-Th
[ Paired rainbow       ]   8.471%    8.511%   1.43  Ks-5c-5h
[ Paired two-suited    ]   8.471%    8.469%  -0.05  Ks-Qs-Qc
[    (more to come)    ]


[ TURN & RIVER ]         Expected    Actual         Example

[ Turn pairs the board ]  15.212%   15.172%     9d-3c-Qc-3s
[ River prs the board  ]  16.903%   16.965%  9c-7s-Kd-2s-7h
[ Turns 4-str board    ]  
[ Turns 3-flush board  ]  
[ Turns 4-flush board  ]  
[ Rivers 3-str board   ]  
[ Rivers 4-str board   ]  
[ Rivers 3-flush board ]      (work in progress)
[ Rivers 4-flush board ]  
[ Double-paired board  ] 
[ Trips on full board  ]   
[ Any Pr on full board ]  
[ No pair by turn      ]  
[ No pair by river     ]  

-----------------------------------------------------------

I know these are hard to read properly on here since you have to scroll the code window horizontally. That's one reason my complete results will probably be posted on pokerftp.com. There's a lot more stuff than just these two tables.

Again, this is a small sample, so it isn't proof of anything and shouldn't be used as such.

Last edited by spadebidder; 09-13-2009 at 11:30 PM.

Quote

09-13-2009 , 11:35 PM

#8482

DMoogle

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 7,243

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

I'll probably have to put it on a web site where I can use full pages

I was just about to suggest this.

Quote

09-13-2009 , 11:51 PM

#8483

PittBigStack

centurion

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 113

well obviously not complaining about this....lol but last night i played in a 45 person Sit N Go and once I got heads up, I had a run at the end where in 4 consecutive hands I had: KK,KK,AA,KK .....seemed a lil fishy to me lol but hey i ended up winning the whole thing so no complaints here

Quote

09-14-2009 , 12:08 AM

#8484

Josem

human chemical weapon

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 18,189

Quote:

Originally Posted by PittBigStack

The fact that this stuff happens is evidence that the shuffle is random.

The fact that something that has just a small chance to happen, and subsequently does happen, itself suggests that the shuffle is truly random.

How can you expect something to be random, yet not sometimes give surprising results? By its very nature, something that is random should be unpredictable, as you (fortunately) discovered.

It makes no sense to suggest that predictable outcomes (in this case, nicely spaced big hands) are a part of any random process.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 02:03 AM

#8485

NFuego20

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 4,295

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucketFoot

When I win it feels rigged.
When I lose it feels rigged.
My guess is it's rigged

Just look at the history on this moron's posts. Nearly all of them are just comments like this with no logic, analysis, etc. A few more meaningless hand histories and he'll be K13.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 02:37 AM

#8486

SwedishMedusa

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 390

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonkoTheClown

How much longer, How much longer? Are we there yet? lol!

Grandpa: Are we there yet?
Homer: No
Grandpa: Are we there yet?
Homer: No
Grandpa: Are we there yet?
Homer: No
Grandpa: ........Where are we going?

Quote

09-14-2009 , 03:07 AM

#8487

Knytestorme

grinder

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 602

Spadebidder, appreciate all the work you are doing for this and was just wondering if you are going to make the code you have written public at all?

I'm on the not likely rigged side but would still like to go over the code being used if possible, just to be able to see that the results are coming from the data and not the algorithms. Would feel a lot more comfortable being able to use the results as a definitive proof to show people that question the validity of online gaming if I'm 100% certain the results aren't massaged.

As a matter of qualifications, I have a degree in science majoring in programming, maths and stats and a degree in commerce majoring in risk management, stocks/options and hedging from the ANU in australia.

If you're not willing to open up the source you are using I can certainly understand that but I hope that's not the case

Quote

09-14-2009 , 08:09 AM

#8488

spadebidder

Actually Shows Proof

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,905

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knytestorme

Spadebidder, appreciate all the work you are doing for this and was just wondering if you are going to make the code you have written public at all?

Yes, the source code will be public and available on pokerftp.com. And a subset of the hand database is already there.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 08:15 AM

#8489

Knytestorme

grinder

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 602

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

Yes, the source code will be public and available on pokerftp.com. And a subset of the hand database is already there.

Very cool, got to love full openness....can't see how there will be able to be any doubt about the results once everyone can verify the code. Hell, can even compile it and then test against their own database and compare the results against HEM to totally verify the validity of it.

I look forward to the upload, and hey post 100 is actually about something worthwhile

Quote

09-14-2009 , 01:28 PM

#8490

2p2member

newbie

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 36

Spadebidder,

Some comments:

1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

I've created two similar tests but they are more rigorous in testing wins vs. expectation and the distribution of the community cards than what is described.

I think the description "more rigorous" is kinda arbitrary on your part. I still prefer the method suggested by me. It's far simpler, more robust, and leaves little room for questions.

2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

I've had to work through some of the issues mentioned by 2p2member.

Ok

3.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

I'm still perfecting the code but once I have something ready to publish then various ways to slice and dice the data will be easy. I've already added a comparison by stakes and I plan to do one by stack sizes too.

I'm curious as to where you plan to publish this stuff...In any case, the skeleton of EXPERIMENT was first developed by optimus, as far as I know. optimus is another screen name of mine. Since we're talking publications (!), then, for the sake of academic integrity/honesty, you will need to acknowledge that.

Last edited by 2p2member; 09-14-2009 at 01:38 PM.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 01:35 PM

#8491

2p2member

newbie

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 36

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

Code:

PREFLOP HEADS-UP ALL-IN ANALYSIS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site #0, 9 to 10 players, NL Hold'em, all stakes combined
Using 25 equity bins.
Number of hands analysed: 1116569
Preflop heads-up all-ins: 7500 (Once per 149 hands).

FAVORITE'S
Preflop equity  ExpW% ExpT%/2  TotExp    Hands    ActW% ActT%/2  TotAct  StdDev

[0.98 - 1.00]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   
[0.96 - 0.98]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   
[0.94 - 0.96]  93.37%   0.71%  94.08%        1    0.00%   0.00%   0.00%   
[0.92 - 0.94]  92.39%   0.67%  93.05%      182   95.05%   0.27%  95.33%    1.24
[0.90 - 0.92]  90.69%   0.66%  91.36%       25   92.00%   0.00%  92.00%    0.12
[0.88 - 0.90]  88.04%   0.57%  88.60%       16   93.75%   0.00%  93.75%    0.66
[0.86 - 0.88]  86.76%   0.49%  87.25%      149   82.55%   0.34%  82.89%   -1.62
[0.84 - 0.86]  84.68%   0.28%  84.96%       52   90.38%   0.00%  90.38%    1.10
[0.82 - 0.84]  82.31%   0.30%  82.61%      251   80.88%   0.80%  81.67%   -0.39
[0.80 - 0.82]  81.08%   0.23%  81.31%     1448   82.94%   0.28%  83.22%    1.87
[0.78 - 0.80]  79.00%   0.20%  79.20%       53   79.25%   0.00%  79.25%    0.01
[0.76 - 0.78]  76.04%   0.63%  76.66%       14   85.71%   0.00%  85.71%    0.81
[0.74 - 0.76]  72.74%   1.95%  74.70%      359   72.14%   3.62%  75.77%    0.48
[0.72 - 0.74]  71.02%   2.01%  73.03%      396   69.70%   4.17%  73.86%    0.38
[0.70 - 0.72]  70.10%   0.99%  71.09%      525   68.95%   1.43%  70.38%   -0.36
[0.68 - 0.70]  67.82%   1.30%  69.12%      533   66.79%   2.35%  69.14%    0.01
[0.66 - 0.68]  66.32%   0.94%  67.26%      290   63.79%   0.86%  64.66%   -0.96
[0.64 - 0.66]  64.41%   0.68%  65.09%      273   67.77%   0.73%  68.50%    1.19
[0.62 - 0.64]  62.30%   0.64%  62.94%      192   63.54%   0.78%  64.32%    0.40
[0.60 - 0.62]  60.18%   0.76%  60.94%      190   57.37%   1.32%  58.68%   -0.64
[0.58 - 0.60]  58.52%   0.60%  59.12%      142   55.63%   1.06%  56.69%   -0.59
[0.56 - 0.58]  56.49%   0.36%  56.85%      688   56.40%   0.65%  57.05%    0.10
[0.54 - 0.56]  54.58%   0.29%  54.87%      564   50.00%   0.62%  50.62%   -2.03 *
[0.52 - 0.54]  42.98%  10.06%  53.04%      583   41.51%  10.03%  51.54%   -0.81
[0.50 - 0.52]  29.32%  21.41%  50.74%      327   30.89%  20.18%  51.07%    0.16

[    ALL    ]  66.35%   2.41%  68.76%     7253   65.97%   2.74%  68.72%   -0.08

* With 22 valid bins, expected deviations > 5% signif = 1.10.  Observed = 1
Chi-Sq for Fav =  6.01 w/ 22 DF. Crit nums (.10 .05 .01) 30.81   33.92   40.29


UNDERDOG'S
Preflop equity  ExpW% ExpT%/2  TotExp    Hands    ActW% ActT%/2  TotAct  StdDev

[0.48 - 0.50]  27.85%  21.41%  49.26%      327   28.75%  20.18%  48.93%   -0.16
[0.46 - 0.48]  36.90%  10.06%  46.96%      583   38.42%  10.03%  48.46%    0.81
[0.44 - 0.46]  44.84%   0.29%  45.13%      564   48.76%   0.62%  49.38%    2.03 *
[0.42 - 0.44]  42.78%   0.36%  43.15%      688   42.30%   0.65%  42.95%   -0.10
[0.40 - 0.42]  40.28%   0.60%  40.88%      142   42.25%   1.06%  43.31%    0.59
[0.38 - 0.40]  38.30%   0.76%  39.06%      190   40.00%   1.32%  41.32%    0.64
[0.36 - 0.38]  36.43%   0.64%  37.06%      192   34.90%   0.78%  35.68%   -0.40
[0.34 - 0.36]  34.24%   0.68%  34.91%      273   30.77%   0.73%  31.50%   -1.19
[0.32 - 0.34]  31.80%   0.94%  32.74%      290   34.48%   0.86%  35.34%    0.96
[0.30 - 0.32]  29.58%   1.30%  30.88%      533   28.52%   2.35%  30.86%   -0.01
[0.28 - 0.30]  27.91%   0.99%  28.91%      525   28.19%   1.43%  29.62%    0.36
[0.26 - 0.28]  24.96%   2.01%  26.97%      396   21.97%   4.17%  26.14%   -0.38
[0.24 - 0.26]  23.35%   1.95%  25.30%      359   20.61%   3.62%  24.23%   -0.48
[0.22 - 0.24]  22.71%   0.63%  23.34%       14   14.29%   0.00%  14.29%   -0.81
[0.20 - 0.22]  20.60%   0.20%  20.80%       53   20.75%   0.00%  20.75%   -0.01
[0.18 - 0.20]  18.46%   0.23%  18.69%     1448   16.51%   0.28%  16.78%   -1.87
[0.16 - 0.18]  17.10%   0.30%  17.39%      251   17.53%   0.80%  18.33%    0.39
[0.14 - 0.16]  14.76%   0.28%  15.04%       52    9.62%   0.00%   9.62%   -1.10
[0.12 - 0.14]  12.26%   0.49%  12.75%      149   16.78%   0.34%  17.11%    1.62
[0.10 - 0.12]  10.83%   0.57%  11.40%       16    6.25%   0.00%   6.25%   -0.66
[0.08 - 0.10]   7.98%   0.66%   8.64%       25    8.00%   0.00%   8.00%   -0.12
[0.06 - 0.08]   6.28%   0.67%   6.95%      182    4.40%   0.27%   4.67%   -1.24
[0.04 - 0.06]   5.21%   0.71%   5.92%        1  100.00%   0.00% 100.00%    
[0.02 - 0.04]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   
[0.00 - 0.02]    .       .       .           0     .       .       .   

[    ALL    ]  28.83%   2.41%  31.24%     7253   28.54%   2.74%  31.28%    0.08

* With 22 valid bins, expected deviations > 5% signif = 1.10.  Observed = 1
Chi-Sq for Dog = 13.35 w/ 21 DF. Crit nums (.10 .05 .01) 29.62   32.67   38.93


NO FAVORITE HANDS
Preflop equity  ExpW% ExpT%/2  TotExp    Hands    ActW% ActT%/2  TotAct  StdDev

[half of 5050]   5.81%  47.10%  50.00%      247   6.48%   46.76%  50.00%    NA

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and here's some of the community card study. Check out all the action flops going on there.

Code:

BOARD CARD ANALYSIS

Site #0, 9 to 10 players, NL Hold'em cash
Number of hands analysed:  1000214
              Flops seen:   601129 (60.1%)
              Turns seen:   382497 (38.2%)
             Rivers seen:   287232 (28.7%)

-----------------------------------------------------------
[ FLOP TYPE ]            Expected    Actual StdDev  Example

[ Rainbow              ]  39.765%   39.803%   0.78  2d-6s-Th
[ Two-suited           ]  55.059%   55.044%  -0.30  9d-3c-Qc
[ Single-suited        ]   5.176%    5.153%  -1.06  7s-4s-5s
[ -check suit types    ] 100.000%  100.000%   

[ Paired flop          ]  16.941%   16.980%   1.03  Ks-5c-5h
[ Triplet flop         ]   0.235%    0.236%   0.08  Jh-Js-Jd
[ Unpaired flop        ]  82.824%   82.785%  -1.03  9d-3c-Qc
[ -check match types   ] 100.000%  100.000%   

[ Pair & connector     ]   2.824%    2.850%   1.57  Ks-Qs-Qc
[ Pair & 1-gap         ]   2.606%    2.617%   0.68  Ks-Jd-Js
[ Pair & 2-gap+        ]  11.511%   11.513%   0.05  Ks-5c-5h
[ Triplets             ]   0.235%    0.236%   0.08  Jh-Js-Jd
[ 3-Straight           ]   3.475%    3.448%  -1.49  Qs-Jd-Kc
[ Connector & 1-gap    ]   6.950%    6.916%  -1.33  3h-Ad-4h
[ Connector & 2-gap+   ]  26.932%   26.960%   0.62  Tc-9h-Ks
[ KA2 double connector ]   0.290%    0.282%  -1.41  2h-Ac-Kd *
[ Double gutshot       ]   3.186%    3.199%   0.78  As-3d-Qh
[ Other 1-gaps         ]  21.430%   21.412%  -0.45  6c-8h-Qc
[ No cnct no 1-gp no pr]  20.561%   20.568%   0.18  9d-3c-Qc
[ -check connect types ] 100.000%  100.000%   

* Broadway card flops like AKx should normally be slightly 
  low due to the known card removal effect of more flops 
  being seen when players hold high cards.  

--Selected combo types--  
[ 3-Straight-Flush     ]   0.217%    0.209%  -1.76  8s-7s-6s
[ Unpaired rainbow     ]  31.059%   31.057%  -0.04  2d-6s-Th
[ Paired rainbow       ]   8.471%    8.511%   1.43  Ks-5c-5h
[ Paired two-suited    ]   8.471%    8.469%  -0.05  Ks-Qs-Qc
[    (more to come)    ]


[ TURN & RIVER ]         Expected    Actual         Example

[ Turn pairs the board ]  15.212%   15.172%     9d-3c-Qc-3s
[ River prs the board  ]  16.903%   16.965%  9c-7s-Kd-2s-7h
[ Turns 4-str board    ]  
[ Turns 3-flush board  ]  
[ Turns 4-flush board  ]  
[ Rivers 3-str board   ]  
[ Rivers 4-str board   ]  
[ Rivers 3-flush board ]      (work in progress)
[ Rivers 4-flush board ]  
[ Double-paired board  ] 
[ Trips on full board  ]   
[ Any Pr on full board ]  
[ No pair by turn      ]  
[ No pair by river     ]  

-----------------------------------------------------------

4. You're calculating equities wrong.

5. Your bin sizes is too large for my taste.

6. I think it's much more interesting to look at FLOP equities (that you chose to consider PRE-FLOP is probably the reason why your bin sizes are kinda large).

7. If you consider flop equities, it'll be interesting to consider permutations of community cards (something I described in an earlier post)

Quote

09-14-2009 , 01:36 PM

#8492

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

He's publishing it on a website, not in an academic journal.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 01:40 PM

#8493

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

2p2, Im a little curious why we would look at flop equities on hands that were all in pre-flop?

Wouldnt it be better to look at hands that went all in on the flop for your experiment?

Quote

09-14-2009 , 01:54 PM

#8494

spadebidder

Actually Shows Proof

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,905

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2p2member

4. No, you are mistaken, these are precisely correct. The possible wins and ties are enumerated for all possible boards for each hand. They aren't "calculated" numbers, they are actual ratios from full enumeration. These are the same numbers you would get from Poker Stove.

5. This is a sample, I vary them from 2 to 200 to evaluate them in various way. I'm not really interested in "your taste" or your tone but if you have constructive suggestions they would be welcome.

6. Analysing flop-to-showdown is an entirely different kind of test, and can't be used to test the distribution of the deal since player decisions come into play. Flop equity (or turn) has no relevance to this analysis.

Last edited by spadebidder; 09-14-2009 at 02:19 PM.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 02:30 PM

#8495

Arouet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6,433

2p2: what's with the 'tude dude? I'm sure there is room for discussion among you stats guys for the best formulas to use and I'm sure that's a valuable debate and I'm sure we would all welcome your contribution here. But I'm not sure why you're flaming Spade. It also seems likely that he could have come up with very similar forumlas to yourself independantly, as I imagine there are certain standard ways to do these types of calculations.

Also, as far as I know, you should be able to have access to the same hand histories as Spadebidder, and you can run your own calculations. I'm sure getting some different perspectives will be useful as well.

This ain't a contest and there's no prize, so just relax a bit! I mean this in a friendly way. I do look forward to seeing what the two of you drum up!

Quote

09-14-2009 , 03:38 PM

#8496

NFuego20

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 4,295

also if you're going to tell somebody they're calculating something wrong.... perhaps it would be a good idea to tell them what is wrong about it? That way your post is actually constructive and not just a flame.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 03:39 PM

#8497

DMoogle

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 7,243

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knytestorme

People don't care about science or math, they just care about what they "feel". Why do you think so many people still believe in creationism?

Quote

09-14-2009 , 03:44 PM

#8498

spadebidder

Actually Shows Proof

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,905

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2p2member
4. You're calculating equities wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spadebidder

As an easy check of this, notice that one bin in there only has a single hand (94-96 bin). That hand is AsAc v Ah9s. Plug that in poker stove and compare.

Code:

	 equity      win     tie  pots won  pots tied
Hand 0:  94.081%  93.37%  00.71%   1598785   12160.00  { AcAs }
Hand 1:  05.919%  05.21%  00.71%     89199   12160.00  { Ah9s }

My table shows
[0.94 - 0.96] 93.37% 0.71% 94.08%
[0.04 - 0.06] 5.21% 0.71% 5.92%

All the bins are exact enumerations like that. They are just the actual counts shown as percentages. Also, the display is rounded for compactness, but the code is all using double precision numbers for everything (64-bit IEEE 754 floating point).

Last edited by spadebidder; 09-14-2009 at 03:55 PM.

Quote

09-14-2009 , 08:56 PM

#8499

jjjou812

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,603

First time post but I wanted to see if there is any research out there to make an informed decision.

Is Full Tilt rigged for action?

I have been playing on Full Tilt regularly for about a year now. I will confess that my on-line poker play is much worse than my live play. I am a winning 2/5 no limit player. In the local live tournament scene I generally make the final table at the deep stack tournaments. My on-line play is more sporatic. Usually when I start a tournament online, I want to leave my office before it is finished. I also use to check the stats of all the other players but no longer do. Also, I generally play too low of limits and make alot more moves than I ever would playing live. Overall, I am a losing tournament player online but I have won seats to atlantis tourni (pokerstars), a seat to the world series and I cashed last year in the main event of the wsop. So dont just write this off as bitching of a losing on-line player....

What I am questioning is some of the things I see over and over again that I consider highly suspicious.

PLO - I have been playing PLO cash for the last few months. I keep seeing 3 of a kind on the board (flop, turn and river). Generally, with the action, the winning player is counterfeited by the OP when the third card (say 10) hits the board giving the player with the pocket pair the winning full house. The counterfeited player normally had aces or kings up. I counted 44 trips on the board in a 6 hour period, playing two or three tables.

In both PLO and NL, the turn card hits everyone in the hand. Everyone - it puts up the flush, two pair open ended straight draw.... I see this happen repeatedly (play a micro limit rebuy tournament and just keep pushing all in so you get to see all the cards) on-line but generally only see it once an hour in live action.

NL Tournament - when players are all in, the number of times the winner goes runner runner for a flush or a straight after being significantly behind on the flop.

Has anyone ever mathmatically compared the number of times these type of events occur on a particular site to compare to the relative probability? Is there any studies of the different sites variances?