The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition
02-22-2010
, 08:32 PM
02-22-2010
, 08:40 PM
02-22-2010
, 08:57 PM
02-22-2010
, 09:00 PM
Quote:
Yeah, it would be fascinating to deeply explore your theory that would be massively easy to detect given you and many people before you have come up with it after a bad beat. In terms of innovation this theory is akin to the matingale. No doubt sites would risk their business manipulating a deal in perhaps the most obvious ways possible, that way they could hide it in plain site or something. Would make the people with AA vs KK fetishes happy as well then.
News for you, every tournament has players that bubble. Sometimes it may be you.
This is called a standard bad beat whine. Who cares. Post it in the BBV section where they will tell you your bad beat is unimpressive, but at least you will have posted it in the correct forum.
Obviously a lot has to do with the payout structure of the tournament at hand.
If you are playing a standard freezeout or rebuy and are near the bubble and theoretically can get it all-in or fold your 50 BB stack with QQ vs K2 then you have to decide if you are playing for a min cash or if playing to go deep is your goal.
Hint, in a $22 freezeout/$10 rebuy type tournament usually the min cash is around $40-50 and the final table prizes are $1,000 to $20,000.
Another hint - get it all in in this case.
If it is a satellite of some sort where 20 make the money and you have a very safe stack with 21 left and are dealt AA with a person who has you covered still to act then obviously fold even if you know his hand consists of a sympathy card and a birthday card. Just sit out in this case to win anyway since the hands you are dealt are meaningless if winning is your goal.
News for you, every tournament has players that bubble. Sometimes it may be you.
This is called a standard bad beat whine. Who cares. Post it in the BBV section where they will tell you your bad beat is unimpressive, but at least you will have posted it in the correct forum.
Obviously a lot has to do with the payout structure of the tournament at hand.
If you are playing a standard freezeout or rebuy and are near the bubble and theoretically can get it all-in or fold your 50 BB stack with QQ vs K2 then you have to decide if you are playing for a min cash or if playing to go deep is your goal.
Hint, in a $22 freezeout/$10 rebuy type tournament usually the min cash is around $40-50 and the final table prizes are $1,000 to $20,000.
Another hint - get it all in in this case.
If it is a satellite of some sort where 20 make the money and you have a very safe stack with 21 left and are dealt AA with a person who has you covered still to act then obviously fold even if you know his hand consists of a sympathy card and a birthday card. Just sit out in this case to win anyway since the hands you are dealt are meaningless if winning is your goal.
02-22-2010
, 09:38 PM
Quote:
That's why the focus of any analysis you do should be on the results. That's the outcome that is produced. That's freely available for anyone to have a look at - Anyone is welcome to request all their hand histories and we'll send them to you.
You'll note that the audits they conducted extended to the output, which confirm that everything is legit.
You'll note that the audits they conducted extended to the output, which confirm that everything is legit.
Would the loss of data from not seeing showdown be enough of a factor in the analysis if you were to play 100k hands of HU and filter for only hands that reached showdown, whether through a call on the river or one player being all-in?
Most HU will be folded pre-flop or on the flop so a bit of data will be lost, but given most of the theories put forth are regarding action flops or getting sucked out on the river one would have to assume that over 100k hands there would be more than enough datapoints for them....if what they believe is actually true.
I'd also say that I'm surprised none of them have ever questioned whether it's only NL that is rigged so obviously they'd want to get about 100k hands in of LHE, Razz, Badugi, Omahahahaha and all the forms of stud just to make sure the sites aren't only rigging the most popular games.
That's easy enough to do for anyone that plays, and as Josem has said if they do it at Stars they can always get their complete hand history. Since nearly all the rigtards that post here claim to be winning players they should have no problem playing the required number of HU hands and then they are sure of the output as they generated it and it gives them what they are always claiming to require without the sites knowing who they are.
I'll have to think more about the impact that the loss of folded hands would have but really if we're seeing consistency across the board as expected then it shouldn't matter what full hands we take out of the set....if Spade or others have an opinion on this feel free to add or correct me
...but overall this is a simple test any player that can at least breakeven and has access to HEM, PT3 or their own self-written tools can do and perform their own analysis on, so have at it and then get back to us if you find any anomolies and we can do a peer review on your methodology and results.
02-23-2010
, 12:14 AM
02-23-2010
, 12:17 AM
Quote:
Careful Xevious, you're close to being called a shill. I'll even help them out. Your were hired by by pokerstars and full tilt's joint anti-rigtard coaltion. You were posing as a soft riggie who would come in here and "beccome convinced" that the game is legit. Brilliant really. How much they payin' you? huh huh?
.
02-23-2010
, 02:29 AM
02-23-2010
, 07:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeIntheGrass
13 shills in here..so every time I make 1 post each one of them responds to it..and then I have to shut them down with 13 responses
Bwaa ha ha ha!
The guy's a legend in his own mind.
