The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition - Page 3202 - Internet Poker

Wrong, it could be found. And how? With mathematics. Do a Google search on poker and working out probabilities.

As for PLO. My experience with small stakes PLO is that players there have a problem folding pre-flop and variance in the game is way more than HE in general. So good luck if you aren't expecting odd hands to outdraw you on a regular basis.

Oh, and as a PS, I do wonder what garbage you showed up at showdown with to be so annoyed to find he had a set? Seriously, PLO is big hand central, and so showing up at showdown with weak holdings is begging to lose a stack.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 02:27 AM

#80027

OnTheSide

enthusiast

Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 83

requesting some info. I understand from this thread that audits have been done checking for statistical abnormalities in data over a large number of hands. I assume someone will be able to link me to anything backing this up? I want to see the actual audit.
anybody here, still claiming pokerstars is a legit site I challenge you to prove this with data. do you think you can do this? or are you just going to ignore this and wait for the next idiot to explain that aces sometimes lose 3 times in a row. I am waiting, thanks.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 02:38 AM

#80028

Bobo Fett

Carpe Diem

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 57,260

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheSide

Here's one I know of:

http://www.spadebidder.com/

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheSide

anybody here, still claiming pokerstars is a legit site I challenge you to prove this with data. do you think you can do this?

I'm not claiming anything, but what is it you're proposing someone would prove? One could come up with hundreds of ways that a rig could be happening - are you looking for someone to prove that none of them are happening? Or do you have something a little simpler in mind?

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheSide

or are you just going to ignore this and wait for the next idiot to explain that aces sometimes lose 3 times in a row. I am waiting, thanks.

You sound sort of irate and impatient with...I'm not sure who. But perhaps I'm reading something into your words that isn't there. For all I know, you wrote this all with a big smile on your face.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 03:26 AM

#80029

huntsman41

adept

Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheSide

How much did you lose with your 3 AA hands? And yep, you're right, they can lose three times in a row. I'm glad you know this. Saves some idiot telling you something massively obvious, though I suspect while you know this you still rant at the monitor when it happens, even if it is one hand.

Why do you and people like you demand proof of innocence with no vague evidence of guilt? And the whole audit/regulated thing has been done to death. Trust or don't. Play or don't. You do have a choice.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 04:00 AM

#80030

OnTheSide

enthusiast

Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 83

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobo Fett

Here's one I know of:

http://www.spadebidder.com/

I'm not claiming anything, but what is it you're proposing someone would prove? One could come up with hundreds of ways that a rig could be happening - are you looking for someone to prove that none of them are happening? Or do you have something a little simpler in mind?

You sound sort of irate and impatient with...I'm not sure who. But perhaps I'm reading something into your words that isn't there. For all I know, you wrote this all with a big smile on your face.

Thank you for this Bobo,
This is actually very helpful to me believe it or not.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 05:27 AM

#80031

Kelvis

banned

Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 8,737

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheSide

requesting some info. I understand from this thread that audits have been done checking for statistical abnormalities in data over a large number of hands. I assume someone will be able to link me to anything backing this up? I want to see the actual audit.
anybody here, still claiming pokerstars is a legit site I challenge you to prove this with data. do you think you can do this? or are you just going to ignore this and wait for the next idiot to explain that aces sometimes lose 3 times in a row. I am waiting, thanks.

I accuse you of murder. You will be sentenced to life in prison and a daily anal rape, can you prove your innocence?

You see how it doesn't work that way? It's up to the one claiming someone is guilty to provide the evidence. In this case, people who claim a site is rigged actually require to provide the evidence to back up their big mouths. Unless you feel you deserve the anal rape because you couldn't show sufficient evidence you are in fact innocent of murder.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 08:32 AM

#80032

madcatz1999

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,274

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheSide

Here's another one, that tested "bad beat" frequency, done by Online Poker Watchdog with, in the case of Pokerstars (they tested several sites), 1 million hands:
http://www.ispokerrigged.com/

Quote

02-06-2016 , 01:41 PM

#80033

jungmit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,972

Quote:

Originally Posted by madcatz1999

Edit: Realized you may be talking about PLO, but I don't really care.

If I have two suited cards, and you have a pair, there are two options:
A) One of your paired cards is the same suit as mine. In that case, you flopping top set and me flopping a flush is impossible.

B) Your cards are different suits than mine. In that case, there are (10*9/2) = 45 flops that will give you a set and me a flush, counting combinations, not permutations. One-third of those (assuming you play all pairs equally often), you'll have top set. So 15 flops, on average. Out of (48*47*46/6) = 17296 possible flops. So, there's a 15/17296 chance that you flop top set, or about 1 in 1153 flops in which you have a pair that's a different suit than my suited cards.

Any other incorrect claims you'd like to have proven wrong?

What does this prove? Interesting line from spade study.

**" As we have predicted, flops are not entirely random but are subject to certain specific card removal effects.** However, with the exception of Rank Bias the effects are so small as to not have much practical effect on the play of the game."

When dealing billions of hands all u need is a small, very small effect on the game. Vegas can make billions off 2% or less. Imagine if certain things happen 1% more then they should online?

*

Last edited by jungmit; 02-06-2016 at 01:59 PM.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 01:48 PM

#80034

LostOstrich

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 15,933

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

What does this prove?

well, you claimed it was impossible to work out the chances of one player flopping a flush and another flopping a set, or something. He's kindly pointed out to you that mathematics is a thing that exists, and can be used to calculate stuff like that.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 01:53 PM

#80035

madcatz1999

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,274

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

What does this prove?

That the block of text that I quoted (from you) is blatantly incorrect.

Your questions are getting easier and easier to answer.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 03:45 PM

#80036

jungmit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,972

Quote:

Originally Posted by LostOstrich

I did not day that. I am saying it's impossible to find out how often it happens over the whole site. Maybe he misunderstood.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 04:02 PM

#80037

Obvious Shill Alt

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 459

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

When dealing billions of hands all u need is a small, very small effect on the game. Vegas can make billions off 2% or less. Imagine if certain things happen 1% more then they should online?

From spadebidder's flop study:

"I think it’s pretty striking that virtually every pattern (except pairs, which we predicted) is accurate to within a hundredth of a percent. That’s 1 flop off per 10,000 trials. And about half the flop types are accurate to the thousandth of a percent, or 1 flop off (or zero) per 100,000 trials."

I know math is difficult for you, but you can't tweak things to happen 1% more than they should and still have flops accurate to hundredths of a percent.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 04:12 PM

#80038

LostOstrich

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 15,933

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

I did not day that. I am saying it's impossible to find out how often it happens over the whole site. Maybe he misunderstood.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

It's not something that will be found. For example u should see a flush flop x times. I shoudl flop top set x times. Etc. How can u find out out how often this things should happen at the same time? U cant. So if u just an Analyze your stats they will look fine as will mine. But this says nothing of the times u flop 2 pair and I have top pair and hit a better 2 pair. All we see is my 2 pair held up as much as it should. It's not info that is gonna prove anything.

ok so maybe it's your inability to communicate with words that's the problem here (again). I've bolded the part that looks like you suggesting USING MATH TO CALCULATE PROBABILITIES IS IMPOSSIBLE, but I guess what you're saying is there's no way of knowing what hands your opponent had unless the hand goes to showdown. If that's your point then of course you're right! But it's a silly, irrelevant point.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 04:39 PM

#80039

jungmit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,972

Quote:

Originally Posted by LostOstrich

Ask pokerstars to send u 1 million hands then check to see how often top set runs into a flush draw then compare that to how often it should happen. Let me know what u find

Quote

02-06-2016 , 04:59 PM

#80040

LostOstrich

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 15,933

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

Ask pokerstars to send u 1 million hands then check to see how often top set runs into a flush draw then compare that to how often it should happen. Let me know what u find

Have you done this yourself? If not, why not?

Quote

02-06-2016 , 06:37 PM

#80041

spanishsail

stranger

Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 11

are you a rigged site 888. the amount of times i have got my money in as a 70-80% favourite and lost. its making me question you. 3 outters always come and pocket 55 hits on the river every time against my kk. really sick of the bad beats are you scamming me or what

Quote

02-06-2016 , 08:02 PM

#80042

Obvious Shill Alt

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 459

You know jungmit might be onto something here, guys. Check this out:

118,228 total hands

100 top sets on boards with flush draws possible

I lost to 3 flush draws, a chop, and a fold on the river because there was a 4 flush on the board. Just look at how much rake those 5 hands made, though!

$0.76 in 0.004% of my hands, what a cash cow!! That's 0.069% of all my rake!!!!

Quote

02-06-2016 , 08:21 PM

#80043

LostOstrich

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 15,933

pretty sure this clown is talking about microstakes omaha though, in which everyone flops at least 2 pair every flop and nobody ever folds

Quote

02-06-2016 , 09:36 PM

#80044

NewOldGuy

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,935

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

Interesting line from spade study.

**" As we have predicted, flops are not entirely random but are subject to certain specific card removal effects.** However, with the exception of Rank Bias the effects are so small as to not have much practical effect on the play of the game."

When dealing billions of hands all u need is a small, very small effect on the game. Vegas can make billions off 2% or less. Imagine if certain things happen 1% more then they should online?

*

Apparently you didn't read enough to know what card removal effect is. It happens with a perfectly normal random deal. That site also talks about flop types being within a hundredth or thousandth of 1 percent of expectation, which is a long long way from 1%.

You really aren't the sharpest tool in the shed.

Quote

02-06-2016 , 10:02 PM

#80045

madcatz1999

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,274

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmit

Since you don't seem to have understood what you read, I'll help you out: what hands do people see the flop more often with in hold'em? Hands with aces or hands with twos? For a flop to be seen, at least two people have to not fold. Therefore, out of the cards still left in the deck, when a flop is seen, there is a decent chance that there are less than 4 aces left (more of a chance than there being less than 4 twos left).

Quote

02-07-2016 , 03:31 AM

#80046

Lessu

Thailand Guru

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,069

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanishsail

What does 888 gain by making you lose and the other player win? They get the same amount of rake no matter who wins or loses the hand.

Quote

02-07-2016 , 05:22 AM

#80047

Lego05

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,034

Pretty sure jungmit was around for the last time that we went through the card removal effect and a 2 being more likely to appear on the flop than an A. Don't care enough to search for it though.

Quote

02-07-2016 , 05:38 AM

#80048

LostOstrich

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 15,933

pretty awesome that he thinks the card removal effect is suspicious, lol

Quote

02-07-2016 , 07:11 AM

#80049

neonaone

newbie

Join Date: Feb 2016 Posts: 15

Ok, "bad beats are parts of poker". I believe that.
But I strongly recommend you that, if you have like AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK kinds of hands and a shortstack pushes on you and if you belive that he is bluffing, just fold.
Today I played in PS:
CO raised, BU (shortstack with 76s) pushes, hero calls with QQ...
BU wins with two pair

UTG (shortstack with 76s) pushes, hero calls with KK...
UTG wins with two pair