Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > > >

Discussion of Poker Sites General discussion of online poker sites.

View Poll Results: Is Online Poker Rigged?
Yes 3,444 34.94%
No 5,522 56.02%
Undecided 892 9.05%
Voters: 9858. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-26-2009, 02:19 PM   #901
jukofyork
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
jukofyork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Trollstopia, UK
Posts: 11,610
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

I was too lazy to read the OP, but is this just a rigged post in disguise?

Juk
jukofyork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:22 PM   #902
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweed _Man View Post
Lose AK vs QQ heads up 100 times in a row (on a street corner?) and then your point will be valid.
Now why couldn't I have put it that succinctly?
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:23 PM   #903
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokrateez View Post
seriously you guys that think there is no difference and there is no cheating are a bunch of sheep who believe anything whatever site tells you that they are doing.
God, you're an idiot!
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:24 PM   #904
stackerhound
stranger
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Scott View Post
Nope. I'm going to get somebody I trust to verify that the quarter being used is unbiased, and that the game is fair. Thankfully, in the case of online poker, that's already been done for you.

http://www.cigital.com/

http://www.gov.im/gambling/
OMG I cant believe Im repsonding to this one - glad u trust them. I myself prefer to trust the Kanawnake ( sp?) gaming comission - lol.
stackerhound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:25 PM   #905
dbcooper279
old hand
 
dbcooper279's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Under 23ft of water
Posts: 1,678
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by stackerhound View Post
So let me see does that mean if you cheated for 1000 hands and then not cheated for the next 999,000,000 hands then no cheating occurred? According to ur PT stats it doesnt look like it.
If you compared the sample (1k cheating + 999mil not cheating) to another sample (999,001,000 not cheating), you would notice a small difference, which would be unable to be accounted for by statistical error.
dbcooper279 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:26 PM   #906
Mr Q
grinder
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the brink of insanity
Posts: 674
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

However if you did flip a coin 100,000 times approx. .0005% of the time one side would have 5000 more outcomes than the other. Meaning heads would be way ahead 1 in 10,000 trials. Not sure if the data being off by more than 2 standard deviations is what he meant or if I explained myself well. This does not mean it is rigged or anything of the sort. It just means that some people will run better than others and some much worse. However in the grand scheme of it all it will come up fairly even most of the time.
Mr Q is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:27 PM   #907
makeit3bets
old hand
 
makeit3bets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Rambling
Posts: 1,810
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Scott View Post
Nope. I'm going to get somebody I trust to verify that the quarter being used is unbiased, and that the game is fair. Thankfully, in the case of online poker, that's already been done for you.

http://www.cigital.com/

http://www.gov.im/gambling/
I CRY SHILL

In all seriousness, if poker sites are rigged, then ty to them for rigging it in my favor. All I ever say to rigtards, and all I ever feel the need to say.
makeit3bets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:27 PM   #908
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by stackerhound View Post
OMG I cant believe Im repsonding to this one - glad u trust them. I myself prefer to trust the Kanawnake ( sp?) gaming comission - lol.
OK, give us all a laugh.

Which rigtard are you?
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:29 PM   #909
dbcooper279
old hand
 
dbcooper279's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Under 23ft of water
Posts: 1,678
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

OP: without googling, what is the prob of getting exactly 50 heads and 50 tails in 100 flips of a fair coin?

You'd be surprised at the results.
dbcooper279 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:29 PM   #910
sokrateez
grinder
 
sokrateez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 421
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by qpw View Post
God, you're an idiot!
no, i'm just not naive
sokrateez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:36 PM   #911
stackerhound
stranger
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by qpw View Post
God, you're an idiot!
Hes an idiot - lets see there has alreadly been online cheating proven - Ultiimate Bet etc. You call him an idiot. Gee I wonder who the real idiot is!
stackerhound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:37 PM   #912
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokrateez View Post
no, i'm just not naive
Actually, naive is exactly what you are.

You see other rigtards who don't understand probability and when they show their ignorance you look at them, scratch your head and then initiate a 'monkey see, monkey do' post.

But you're still good for amusement value.
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:40 PM   #913
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by stackerhound View Post
Hes an idiot - lets see there has alreadly been online cheating proven - Ultiimate Bet etc. You call him an idiot. Gee I wonder who the real idiot is!
Clue: There's more than one.

On this thread 'sokrateez' is one and I suspect that you are in the habit of refering to the other by the use of the perpendicular pronoun.
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:41 PM   #914
MicroBob
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
MicroBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 61,580
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by stackerhound View Post
My theory is the 100,000 hand argument is a fallacy. Period. Discrepancies can be determined with much smaller sample.


Just to be nice I will explain to you that the coin-flipping exercise is a very different thing from the poker-hand exercise. Different exercises will require different sample-sizes to produce meaningful results.

It is very possible for a winning player at poker to have a losing or break-even stretch for 10k+ hans for example. It is several magnitudes closer to impossible for random events to cause such a long losing streak in the coin-flipping exercise.

The variance involved with determining one's win-rate at poker is much longer partly because of the fact that you are playing only a fraction of the hands anyway and then there's even a smaller fraction of those that you take to showdown and/or actually try to win.

your coin-flipping analogy shows that you really don't know what you are talking about because it's not even close to being related to the hand-sample requirements to draw semi-decent conclusions wrt to a player's win-rate.
MicroBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:41 PM   #915
Mitch Evans
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,633
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokrateez View Post
no, i'm just not naive
Maybe so, however there's enough of us that have winrates over hundreds of thousands or millions of hands. That fact tends to make us think it's on the level... that, and that pesky little fact that everything falls within statistical mean. So, how many hands do you have in your database?
Mitch Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:44 PM   #916
sokrateez
grinder
 
sokrateez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 421
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Evans View Post
Maybe so, however there's enough of us that have winrates over hundreds of thousands or millions of hands. That fact tends to make us think it's on the level... that, and that pesky little fact that everything falls within statistical mean. So, how many hands do you have in your database?
i couldnt tell you how many hands i have played. i play for fun and am not that serious about it. im at least smart enough to tell there is a difference.

i wouldnt even go as far to say it happens on all sites, however, on FT and UB there is no question
sokrateez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:53 PM   #917
stackerhound
stranger
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by qpw View Post
Actually, naive is exactly what you are.

You see other rigtards who don't understand probability and when they show their ignorance you look at them, scratch your head and then initiate a 'monkey see, monkey do' post.

But you're still good for amusement value.
I find it interesting people who argue by hurling insults rather than good solid logic. Someone who establishes his point by labeling someone a "rigtard" who doesnt understand probability.

Avoids the point by creating irrelevant issues to misdirect the discussion - the smoke and mirrors defense.

Point 1 - the 100,000 hand argument - the more hands u watch the more the cheating can be diluted - the more diluted the less recognizable. That at does not mean it did not occur.
stackerhound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:54 PM   #918
Mitch Evans
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,633
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokrateez View Post
i couldnt tell you how many hands i have played. i play for fun and am not that serious about it. im at least smart enough to tell there is a difference.

i wouldnt even go as far to say it happens on all sites, however, on FT and UB there is no question
Seriously, can you elaborate how you're smart enough to tell there's a difference when you have no saved hands to prove your hypothesis? That's pretty arrogant, no? I mean, are you just going from memory and determining there's a difference? Are you rainman? Definitely, definitely, definitely rigged. Definitely. I'm a good driver. Definitely rigged.
Mitch Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:55 PM   #919
sokrateez
grinder
 
sokrateez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 421
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Evans View Post
Maybe so, however there's enough of us that have winrates over hundreds of thousands or millions of hands. That fact tends to make us think it's on the level... that, and that pesky little fact that everything falls within statistical mean. So, how many hands do you have in your database?
also what you are telling me is that the same companies who have already been caught cheating in outlandish ways would not key in a simple program in to their software to put out cards that would entice betting and therefore increase rake for the company?

this is far less trackable than them creating super users that can see others hole cards. and if it was ever brought up or investigated it could be taken out of the software all together
sokrateez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:56 PM   #920
makeit3bets
old hand
 
makeit3bets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Rambling
Posts: 1,810
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

I dont know about you guys, but I definitely believe a guy who plays for fun more than many, many people with million hand databases that show little to no statistical anomalies in the long term. You're all shills anyway.
makeit3bets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:58 PM   #921
sokrateez
grinder
 
sokrateez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tampa, Fl.
Posts: 421
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Evans View Post
Seriously, can you elaborate how you're smart enough to tell there's a difference when you have no saved hands to prove your hypothesis? That's pretty arrogant, no? I mean, are you just going from memory and determining there's a difference? Are you rainman? Definitely, definitely, definitely rigged. Definitely. I'm a good driver. Definitely rigged.
prove to me its not
sokrateez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:58 PM   #922
Cry Me A River
Orange is the new Green
 
Cry Me A River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 23,790
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokrateez View Post
i couldnt tell you how many hands i have played. i play for fun and am not that serious about it. im at least smart enough to tell there is a difference.
No you're not. Nobody short of Rain Man is. That's why statistical analysis of large sample sizes are required. The human brain is very, very good at finding patterns. Even where there are none. That's why anecdotal evidence is an oxymoron. That's why scientific studies use double blind tests. (Well that and a lot of people tend to just be full of ****).

Confirmation Bias

Quote:
i wouldnt even go as far to say it happens on all sites, however, on FT and UB there is no question
Why are you playing on sites you think are rigged?
Cry Me A River is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 02:59 PM   #923
Cry Me A River
Orange is the new Green
 
Cry Me A River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 23,790
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokrateez View Post
prove to me its not
Prove to me there's no such thing as unicorns.
Cry Me A River is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 03:01 PM   #924
otatop
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: unstuckpolitics.com
Posts: 12,727
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by dbcooper279 View Post
Bring the proof oh great one.
It's simple. He's played a few hundred hours (maybe) of live poker, and has a huuuuge 10k hand sample.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukofyork View Post
I was too lazy to read the OP, but is this just a rigged post in disguise?

Juk
It's not very well disguised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stackerhound View Post
Hes an idiot - lets see there has alreadly been online cheating proven - Ultiimate Bet etc. You call him an idiot. Gee I wonder who the real idiot is!
Ultimate Bet's cheating had nothing to do with what you're talking about, idiot.
otatop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2009, 03:02 PM   #925
Cry Me A River
Orange is the new Green
 
Cry Me A River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 23,790
Re: 100,000 Poker Hand Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by stackerhound View Post
Point 1 - the 100,000 hand argument - the more hands u watch the more the cheating can be diluted - the more diluted the less recognizable. That at does not mean it did not occur.
Are you into Homeopathy?
Cry Me A River is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive