Do you think it is possible that you might be overplaying KK?

It seems more likely to me that a long-term track record of losing showdowns with KK indicates you might be making a strategy error. After all, your opponent is more likely to go to showdown if they have a strong hand...

Nobody ****ing cares.

I'd put odds on you having a showdown win% of 65% at least. If not you're likely playing them badly if you've played 150k.

On just an ace landing you should know the probability of this happening, and so it should be a massively easy job to filter your hands in HEM or PT4 to show how an A has hit the flop too often, or by showdown too often.

I can tell you for certain (I just checked) and I've seen an ace by showdown 3 times LESS than is statistically probable and seen an ace on the flop exactly the right amount of times that statistics say I should.

So this idea of always or never is just you making up rubbish I suspect. If not, please feel free to prove it from your 150k of hands.

On PS show down % won is 60% on 888, 67%. These are my 888 and PS graphs for KK. They are totally different. PS is just zoom.

Now I keep getting told I am over playing KK, but that would also mean it keeps losing at show down a very high % of the time, when it should not. KK is supposed to be a great hand apparently, even a donkey should have decent shown down winnings with it. Is that really just variance?

Anyway I busted my PS roll so done with that nonsense. Would have doubled up with KK vs AK but of course not. Then finally AK lost to A10 so was fitting to go out on the typical hilarious PS bad beats. Waste of time.

Why shouldn't it? The most common winning hand at showdown is 2 pair, and KK is one pair. Refer to a hand ranking chart for help. No, more likely it's your lack of skill. Tough to hear, obviously, but the most likely explanation.

This graph was filtered with all my pocket AA KK on pokerstars.
Is normal to be 1200 bb under ev over just 1200 hands?

The last ~550 hands there are even or slightly ahead of EV. The two downswings there happened in pretty small segments, between 120-200 and again between 350-400 (and a smaller one at around 600). Play more hands and some of those will go the other way too.

If Winamax is not rigged i eat a dick, literally

loll right...

You realize you left your username in that graph?

You realize that your sharkscope graph implies that you are simply a bad poker player? (Looking at your ignorance you probably don't even know what sharkscope is )

I mean, you managed to bink a tourney for some money and it's almost gone already.

You are down several thousands of dollars with about 5k hands. A real poker player would call you the fish of the century.

Looks like you suck big time and you should never expect to make serious money with poker.

Quit Poker, get a job that fits you.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54.../#post44694614

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/13...-mtts-1476578/

Tommydevito on 888poker

bigb00bi3s on Pokerstars

im glad u bring that point because look at my stats on 888





I have an ROI of 80% with 1000 game played

Now look at my stats on stars


How come its night and day??
How come do I aaaalways lose as a favourite on stars but not on 888?

Because 888 is a public compagny and their RNG is tested properly.
Pokerstars RNG testing is a joke they are being told when will be the testing. LOL
And i guess since u didnt post any graph u are probably down waaaay more than 5k LOL

RONpasBenFournier:

My Stars graph is similar. Long stretches of pretty much just losing and then big wins. That's the nature of the beast. Especially considering how much softer 888 is at 20-50bi. I play both sites and hands down there are way more fish on 888. Anything above 30% on Stars is bloody good going.

Also, read this by Noah

http://www.nsdpoker.com/2011/01/mtt-pros/

It will change the way you think about MTTs.

Is that some sort of dish detergent? If so, and you think it's rigged against you, I'd like to remind you that you should brush the dishes off over a trash can and rinse them before you put them in the wash. It'll probably seem less rigged that way.

I'm been screwed out of almost 50% of my entitled winnings from one of the most common type of hand in the game? If they rigged straight flushes against me it wouldn't be too bad since they come around so rarely anyway, but this is 1 pair hands we're talking about.

That's got nothing to do with the graph I posted.

Though I will observe how it always is the 'other' guy coming out ahead. I never get 'my' share of good variance where I suck out on the fish, hit full house after full house and get paid off.

If that graph isn't conclusive it's clear you'll never regard any proof as conclusive. The proof I've posted here over the months is stonewall, only someone blinded by Stars fanboyism could deny it.

BTW everyone...what are are odds of 3 of the same suit community cards appearing by the river? Not neccesarily that someone has the flush, but just the chances of 3 same suited cards on the board? Because it happens EVERY SINGLE TIME over on Pokerstars and 888poker. The third card always comes and kills action especially when you flop 2 pair or a set.

I know for a fact when there's 2 of the same suit cards on the flop, there's a 36% chance a third one will hit by the river. But on Stars and 888, it hits a good 80% of the time at least.

If you say so.

Pretty sure it is 34.97%, but lets not split hairs.

And why are you asking this question? You know the answer roughly already. It's 2:1 that there will be a third suit by river if two are on flop. And you lower the odds a little more if you are including backdoor flush as well.

Did you look at how often it has happened to you? Did you filter for "board texture" > "Board suits"? Obviously add in saw river filter too. Do one run just on how many times you had two suited cards on flop, and then run again for 3 same suit by river.

My stats for both types of possibility is that there has been 3 suited cards by river 14 more times than expected. Not significant then really. Guess you are seeing differently?

I've not run a filter yet but I guarantee the 3rd flush card hits about 80% of the time where there is two on the flop. Maybe it hits even more, seems to happen every single time anyway.

That's super-awesome. Nothing like a good guesswork rig that you guarantee is right.

How many times does a flush hit and nobody in the hand has it? Pretty close to zero, isn't that a bit weird?

no, u.

Another outright lie from someone that has not checked their stats at all. I have tons of hands that were won where no-one had the possible flush.

Trolling and lying. So boring.

I don't play on stars, moron. I don't work for them either. I live in MARYLAND, dumbass.

Your graph is not CONCLUSIVE. Your graph shows EV and only EV which is affected by how YOU play.

Your graph is an indicator. JUST an indicator - an indicator that closer examination could be justified - and the closer examination? Hand histories (complete ones not cherry picked) focusing on the places where your EV deviates from expectation.

And I still bet we'll find you started over playing pairs and folding.

in my games numerous times, if you mean what i think.

if I understand right your asking how many times is it possible for someone to have a flush in a hand and in fact no one does.

I play fixed limit games and they get aggressive, with some people rightly or wrongly trying to rep a flush when it hits.

the thing is often in fixed limit by the time you get to the river with the fixed bets your often getting 5-1 or 10-1 on your call. whilst in NL someone can put you to a decision for all your chips.

it makes sense to bet in fixed limit as you get big returns for a cheap bluff and it makes sense to call because you are getting great pot odds and usually if they are only bluffing 20-30% of the time its a profitable call in long run.

The amount of times I have called and seen that no one has a flush, is rather signficiant. it happens every session i play literally.

i think NL may be different due to bets bluffs been more risky and lower returns on bluffs and it been more costly to call the bluffs.

your simply wrong on this one.

Apparently that doesnt apply to all donkeys.


You say that as if he was once right about something else.

The third flush card hits way more often than it should, I assure you. Anyone playing online poker can confirm this.