The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition
12-01-2013
, 10:53 PM
Quote:
Mathematics truly is hard. I posted an equivalent scenario, but it evaded you.
The probability of what you saw was 1, 100%, not some lunatic post hoc calculation like you attempted to show.
As to how much I get paid for this, the answer is precisely nothing. I am a professional software developer (currently for a fortune 100 company), I have no connection with pokerstars other than that I play there and am supernova VIP status, and I volunteer my time moderating 2+2 for free.
I know that you won't see it this way, but anyway:
We get people posting here from time to time that appear to be mentally ill in some way. They tend to be obsessive and monomaniacal, have extensively developed and baroque theories, but no evidence to back up what they say.
They commonly bombard the poker sites with incomprehensible and ridiculous emails, and find the lack of an immediate confirmation that they are right as a demonstration that their targets have something to hide.
They produce childishly worked out examples that prove nothing, or in some cases the opposite of what they think it does, and become angry when people here are unconvinced.
They develop further theories that the reason they are not taken seriously is because their antagonists are acting in bad faith, usually because they must be paid somehow to act that way.
There are other things that some of them do, but the above things seem to fit with you. I don't know if you are actually mentally ill, or if you have been diagnosed as such, but you really do seem to be. I'm not a doctor, and even if I was such a diagnosis couldn't be done over the internet (obviously). You should see a doctor, if you haven't already. This advice is well meaning by the way, although I give it in the full expectation that you won't see it that way.
The probability of what you saw was 1, 100%, not some lunatic post hoc calculation like you attempted to show.
As to how much I get paid for this, the answer is precisely nothing. I am a professional software developer (currently for a fortune 100 company), I have no connection with pokerstars other than that I play there and am supernova VIP status, and I volunteer my time moderating 2+2 for free.
I know that you won't see it this way, but anyway:
We get people posting here from time to time that appear to be mentally ill in some way. They tend to be obsessive and monomaniacal, have extensively developed and baroque theories, but no evidence to back up what they say.
They commonly bombard the poker sites with incomprehensible and ridiculous emails, and find the lack of an immediate confirmation that they are right as a demonstration that their targets have something to hide.
They produce childishly worked out examples that prove nothing, or in some cases the opposite of what they think it does, and become angry when people here are unconvinced.
They develop further theories that the reason they are not taken seriously is because their antagonists are acting in bad faith, usually because they must be paid somehow to act that way.
There are other things that some of them do, but the above things seem to fit with you. I don't know if you are actually mentally ill, or if you have been diagnosed as such, but you really do seem to be. I'm not a doctor, and even if I was such a diagnosis couldn't be done over the internet (obviously). You should see a doctor, if you haven't already. This advice is well meaning by the way, although I give it in the full expectation that you won't see it that way.
Nice of you to call me mentally ill tho, cheers.
12-01-2013
, 11:02 PM
Quote:
Mamoht_T has played 6,312 tournaments on Tilt ($60 ave buy in)
apestyles has played 5,217 tournaments on Tilt ($428 ave buy in)
They have only been in 436 of the same tournaments
Scoopandstack is down about 60k lifetime, so odd choice for a collusion team mate. Of the 2,890 games he has played he has only been in 689 of the same ones as Mamoht_T and has been in 1,336 of the same ones as apestyles.
However since his average buy in is $300 or so it makes sense he would be in more of the same tournaments with apestyles, and given that the $300+ tournaments are not common one would expect many who play those will be in the same tournaments as each other.
Most are probably happy when Scoopandstack is in one.
Many other names on that list do not even show as valid Full Tilt accounts.
You actually do work in an obsessed manner which is unusual for a riggie, but your data does not quite play out the way you say it does. Feel free to give a complete breakdown of each players volume with each other and show HHs that will back your story.
If you were that nutjob that said he could predict 95% of all-ins before the cards are dealt let me know if you still want to do that bet. Very easy to record random MTT tables on Stars (different buy ins) and you can pick the winners beforehand and also we can freeze after the flop is dealt and you can pick again if you want to change your mind.
If you get 95% correct (all hands will be all-in preflop) you win the bet. Min wager $5,000, and you will need to escrow. Let me know.
Also, I cannot believe you guys talked about the triple draw thing again, when the way they handle the situation was chosen based on feedback from the players that actually play the game. Weird rig since it almost never comes up and the rake would be capped whenever it does, but I guess riggies will cling to anything like that, Planet Poker, and the fake university study that proved that the more people who are dealt in a hand the greater the expected value of the winning hand at showdown.
All the best.
apestyles has played 5,217 tournaments on Tilt ($428 ave buy in)
They have only been in 436 of the same tournaments
Scoopandstack is down about 60k lifetime, so odd choice for a collusion team mate. Of the 2,890 games he has played he has only been in 689 of the same ones as Mamoht_T and has been in 1,336 of the same ones as apestyles.
However since his average buy in is $300 or so it makes sense he would be in more of the same tournaments with apestyles, and given that the $300+ tournaments are not common one would expect many who play those will be in the same tournaments as each other.
Most are probably happy when Scoopandstack is in one.
Many other names on that list do not even show as valid Full Tilt accounts.
You actually do work in an obsessed manner which is unusual for a riggie, but your data does not quite play out the way you say it does. Feel free to give a complete breakdown of each players volume with each other and show HHs that will back your story.
If you were that nutjob that said he could predict 95% of all-ins before the cards are dealt let me know if you still want to do that bet. Very easy to record random MTT tables on Stars (different buy ins) and you can pick the winners beforehand and also we can freeze after the flop is dealt and you can pick again if you want to change your mind.
If you get 95% correct (all hands will be all-in preflop) you win the bet. Min wager $5,000, and you will need to escrow. Let me know.
Also, I cannot believe you guys talked about the triple draw thing again, when the way they handle the situation was chosen based on feedback from the players that actually play the game. Weird rig since it almost never comes up and the rake would be capped whenever it does, but I guess riggies will cling to anything like that, Planet Poker, and the fake university study that proved that the more people who are dealt in a hand the greater the expected value of the winning hand at showdown.
All the best.
But for factual correctness. p00cket00 and moorman1 were the two I never spelt exactly correct, that Is hardly 'many' is it.
There is also another player, 'mrbrat' I won't say too much about him just yet, because in the very near future I am going to destroy his world.
All the best.
12-02-2013
, 12:02 AM
Quote:
Seriously dude, not everyone is a nano stakes donk like you who is obsessed with players that play higher buy ins, and many people here are interested in uncovering cheating when it actually exists, so the fact you are too lazy to do some basic prep work shows how seriously you should be taken.
In your crazy emails to Tilt you suggest these guys play the same tournaments but I have already shown that they do not according to sharkscope. If you want to suggest Sharkscope is in on the conspiracy then go for it, but for now I will trust their tracking data over the word of a person who cannot even bother to say the right user names.
Ignoring your "spelling errors" as you call it, you still have not shown any data which shows what you are suggesting, and I have shown sharkscope data which shows pretty much the opposite of what you are suggesting.
Is the sharkscope data wrong- yes or no.
Have fun with your weird stalking , but until you provide real proof you will continue to be ignored by all the sites, and if you want to validate your beliefs with that go for it, but that is why you are stuck posting crazy in riggie threads to be mocked instead of posting threads that have an impact like many others have done in collusion and botting cases that were real and documented with proper research.
Have fun in your freerolls, and if you get lucky maybe one day you can play the games that others will watch who then and makeup stuff about you! Hopefully they will spell your user name right...
All the best.
In your crazy emails to Tilt you suggest these guys play the same tournaments but I have already shown that they do not according to sharkscope. If you want to suggest Sharkscope is in on the conspiracy then go for it, but for now I will trust their tracking data over the word of a person who cannot even bother to say the right user names.
Ignoring your "spelling errors" as you call it, you still have not shown any data which shows what you are suggesting, and I have shown sharkscope data which shows pretty much the opposite of what you are suggesting.
Is the sharkscope data wrong- yes or no.
Have fun with your weird stalking , but until you provide real proof you will continue to be ignored by all the sites, and if you want to validate your beliefs with that go for it, but that is why you are stuck posting crazy in riggie threads to be mocked instead of posting threads that have an impact like many others have done in collusion and botting cases that were real and documented with proper research.
Have fun in your freerolls, and if you get lucky maybe one day you can play the games that others will watch who then and makeup stuff about you! Hopefully they will spell your user name right...
All the best.
But I wont, being ignored by a bunch of know it alls is far more rewarding.
12-02-2013
, 02:44 AM
this is how you win playing pokerstars.. dont get sucked into hands when you know others will beat you
You know its going to let the all in player win so that they can get more rake
eat you
You know its going to let the all in player win so that they can get more rake
Poker Stars, $0.25/$0.50 Pot Limit Omaha Cash, 6 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite. View Hand #21296211
UTG: $25.73 (51.5 bb)
MP: $92.44 (184.9 bb)
Hero (CO): $48.20 (96.4 bb)
BTN: $56.07 (112.1 bb)
SB: $50 (100 bb)
BB: $50 (100 bb)
Preflop: Hero is CO with 4
6 8
6
UTG raises to $1.75, MP folds, Hero calls $1.75, BTN calls $1.75, 2 folds
Flop: ($6) J
6 9 (3 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $2.50, BTN raises to $11.50, UTG calls $11.50, Hero folds
Turn: ($31.50) 5 (2 players)
UTG checks, BTN bets $22.50, UTG calls $12.48 and is all-in
River: ($56.46) K (2 players, 1 is all-in)
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite. View Hand #21296211
UTG: $25.73 (51.5 bb)
MP: $92.44 (184.9 bb)
Hero (CO): $48.20 (96.4 bb)
BTN: $56.07 (112.1 bb)
SB: $50 (100 bb)
BB: $50 (100 bb)
Preflop: Hero is CO with 4
6 8 6UTG raises to $1.75, MP folds, Hero calls $1.75, BTN calls $1.75, 2 folds
Flop: ($6) J
6 9 (3 players)UTG checks, Hero bets $2.50, BTN raises to $11.50, UTG calls $11.50, Hero folds
Turn: ($31.50) 5
(2 players)UTG checks, BTN bets $22.50, UTG calls $12.48 and is all-in
River: ($56.46) K
(2 players, 1 is all-in)Spoiler:
eat you
Last edited by rackitup0509; 12-02-2013 at 02:54 AM.
12-02-2013
, 04:32 AM
12-02-2013
, 05:00 AM
12-02-2013
, 05:11 AM
Your calculation was faulty from the get go, and I illustrated that with a similar example. The probability of your example was 1, not the 1 in 18 lifetimes that you calculated it to be. This is the 3rd time that I have mentioned this now, yet you still think that I have said nothing in response to your original post. You appear to be easily confused.
12-02-2013
, 09:33 AM
2 - It distracts from real issues like collusion or botting and real poker site malfeasance. Because of this thread and similar, it's that much harder for something like the UB or AP scandals to get traction and much easier to cover up as just another crazy riggy complaint.
3 - A basic sense of justice. Accusing people and companies of crimes with no evidence is pretty scummy.
4 - Occam's razor
5 - 2+2 hates stupid and decreasing the amount of stupid in the world is doing God's work.
6 - The Internet is for porn. Arguing is the next best thing:
2 - Dunning–Kruger effect
3 - Confirmation bias
4 - Apophenia
5 - Paranoia
6 - An inability to take responsibility for one's own failures and/or a sense of entitlement resulting in the need to find blame for why this very special snowflake which has never failed at anything before (also never tried anything difficult and/or for which everyone didn't automatically get a trophy) suddenly can't succeed.