Not as different as you think newbie.

Angry, xenophobic people have been saying this for years and will keep saying it for years. Hell, you have been droning on the same thing for years.

Will things change? Of course, just like things have changed in this industry for years. Will they change in the way you hope or dream? Not really as that is not how the actual real world works. Will you keep repeating your same angry mutterings for years? Yeah, that does not change, that's what people like you do, with the only change being things like weird Sexton references that might reflect some inner feeling on your part.

Actually, a racist xenophobe like you loving Party Poker is a bit strange - do you know who owns and runs it?

Anyway, the thread has a new influx of riggies whining about bad beats and conspiracies at 5 and 10 cent games. Perhaps you should calm them down with your endless claims of the imminent change while shills mock their lack of databases, math skills and logic.

Some things do not change.

All the best.

OK, show us your maths for the correct answer.

You left out a few factors, and it is quite a bit more rare than that. Playing KK totally passively, like always check-calling thinking you are setting a clever trap, would make them lose a lot more than normal, but I still think the stat was made up, as it's hard to lose with KK ten times in a row in holdem even if you play with your eyes closed. Really really hard.

You guys are letting a troll use made up stats to get an argument going.

he's been banned like 5 times and continues to play on rigged poker sites.

talk about not being able to take a hint!

Yeah, I think those sums were wrong as well.

At a glance they looked like the odds for an 'all-in lottery' type of scenario, where all 10 players just went all-in every hand. Under those circumstances, yeah, kings probably would lose 10 times in a row every eight hours or whatever percentage of the time was stated.

However, when you factor in all the possibilities of other people folding, etc, it's actually very difficult, (impossible ??) to calculate the odds of kings losing 10 times in a row, but I'd suggest using the same example of playing-time given above, it would be more like every 8 years rather than every 8 hours.

So, further to what I wrote yesterday.......

After 4 days of playing these 6-man tournaments, I've still lost every all-in where I've had a pair and opponent has had an ace as their single overcard.

After 4 days, it's interesting and a bit concerning but probably nothing more at this stage. I'll keep people updated.

Also, further to the 'carve-ups' I mentioned yesterday, I was playing a tournament today, 5 people left and I get dealt 10, 10 on the button. I raise to 3 times the big blind and the player in the big blind calls my raise, whilst holding 4, 2 off-suit (??!?).

The flop comes 6, 5, 3.

How am I meant to legislate for that, get away from that or rationalise losing like that ? Please tell me I'm not going mad and that is a nonsense call ? ? Is there any way, with around 20 big blinds that I can get away from that hand, or would it be terrible play to fold here ?

Perhaps more worryingly, I sharkscope the player who made the call with the 4, 2 and see that they are making money on the site !! Which would seem to back up what I said yesterday about bad plays and bad players being pandered to. If I turned up and started calling raises with 4, 2, I'd expect to lose a lot of money very quickly, not be making a profit.

A lot of responses on here seem to suggest that this thread is just about people who are losing money needing someone to blame. I don't think it's as simple as that. I'm WINNING MONEY, yet I'm seeing how much more I could and should be winning if my hands had held up nearer the expected number of times and this is worrying me.

As I said, it's still a small sample size and I'll keep people updated, but just how far from the expected values my results are does give cause for concern at this stage.

You have no idea if your hands are holding up the expected number of times. You post the hand every time your hand doesn't hold up and you don't do any deeper analysis then that. There's never any statistics over a large sample collected with a tracking program with mathematical analysis of those tracked results in your posts.

Your hands aren't expected to hold up 100% of the time.

What are you talking about ?

I do have an idea if my hands are holding up the expected number of times. I stated on my other posts how often they should hold up and how often they were. Also, without knowing exactly how often a pair should beat a hand with one overcard, in an all-in situation, I'm pretty sure it's around 70%, rather than the 0% which I'm witnessing.

Also, 'You post the hand every time your hand doesn't hold up,' again, what utter nonsense. If I posted the hand every time I got a bad beat, I'd spend more time on here than I do playing poker. I'd love to see evidence of these posts you're on about.

I'm fully aware my hands aren't expected to hold up 100% of the time. I never suggested anything like that. I'm also aware, as you are, that certain hands are expected to hold up more than the 30%s or 0%s that I've been witnessing as well.

You really play poker?

Of course.

No rigtard would take any notice anyway so there's no point in refining things.

The quoted figure is the probability that if you sit at a full ring table and get KK and all the hands play out, someone will beat you.

Obviously in the real world there are several things that will make the real figure smaller, and most of them are not easily quantifiable, but it is nonetheless an interesting figure because it (should) demonstrate to some people that KK is nowhere near as potent as they think it is.

But even with your 'maths degree' actually pointing out an error is beyond you?

Have you ever considered the possibility that your hands are holding up less than expected because.. wait for it...

You're running bad? :-O

Well if I missed you posting a large sample of hands from a tracking program and mathematical analysis of that sample then I apologize. Could you link me to it?

But I didn't see that. All I saw was you saying should hold up X% and actually are holding up Y%. There's nothing to back that up and it's impossible for a human being to just eyeball these numbers from memory so if that's all you were doing it carries no weight.

Anyone thinking the cards are randomly dealt are living in a fantasy land.

Search his threads and posts. You are asking him questions he has been asked tons of times before. They never get answered, and they just lead to more questions by him as he looks to talk it over.

He just likes to talk endlessly and meaninglessly (usually about ipoker) and pops in every couple of months to find people that do not know his posting history. This is basically his 10th time + doing this routine, maybe more, and he distracts from the proper riggie/shill conversations that take place here.

It's Fantasy Island. Need my address?

how does one generate this?

You're still a muppet.

Well I've made a lot of money playing poker. Can you show me anything that should make me think the cards are dealt in some particular way?

There is no such thing as a "proper riggie/shill conversations" here. Proper conversations include analysis of the past results. All you get here is people claiming stuff is rigged with absolutely 0 to back it up and people making fun of them. And then there are a few people who have actually done math that seems to say everything is above board. And then more people who say it is rigged because they lost however many times with whatever type of hands.


I understand the guy I responded to most likely thinks online poker is rigged despite the fact that he has not the slightest bit of proof for it .... I understand that because everybody who posts here thinks that because if they post here and didn't think that, then they would have to accept that they were a losing player ...... and if they did enough work to find the 2+2 forum and find this thread then they can't accept they are a losing player ..... though if they actually put work into it correctly at the 2+2 strategy forums they might actually become winning players .... if they do it right.




Anyway .... yea, I'm aware he's a losing player and somebody who just posts nonsense over and over while believing that it is not nonsense .... although it obviously is nonsense.

HEM or PT3. If you don't have either, send your hand histories to someone who does...

Yes, I have considered this as the most realistic possibility.

I was just interested in how long these worrying results would have to continue before they could be considered serious cause for concern.

I'm certainly not 'eyeballing these numbers from memory' and I agree it would be difficult for a human to do this and not become, (perhaps accidentally,) selective along the way.

I'm keeping records of my all-in hands and these are the results I'm seeing. It is a pretty small sample size at the moment, but the results are so far from expected that it was enough to worry me. I will keep people updated as my sample size grows and will be happy to report back if it turns out I was just running bad and results are more realistic in the long run.

Sorry, I thought I had a reasonable grasp on the English language, but I didn't know you could be 'aware' of something which wasn't true. You saying you're 'aware he's a losing player,' is like someone saying they're 'aware grass is pink,' or 'aware the earth is flat.' It doesn't make sense.

Also, please explain how you think it's ok for you to state that someone is a losing player, without any evidence, yet it's not ok for someone to state results they're witnessing without evidence ? Does it not need to be the same rules for everyone ?

I've made tens of thousands of pounds playing poker, (mostly online,) and made a living from it for 3 years now, with a slight blip in the middle admittedly.

I stated only a few posts ago that I wasn't a losing player, but a winning player, concerned about how much more I could and should be winning if my hands had held up nearer the correct percentage of times. That is the truth.

Also, I'm not sure whether the dealing on the site I play on is fair or not. I'm not throwing any accusations about, (blatant ones or subtle ones.) I was merely asking what sort of size of sample I'd be looking for before becoming seriously concerned. I'm aware that it will be more than the 5 days of tournaments I'm currently holding.

Geeze you don't (know how to) use PT3 or HEM and you are here whining about poker is ...