yep I flagged him when he posted his brilliant new thread a few days ago but I guess nobody got around to banning him yet.... this is really gonna hurt his quest for 100 gimmick accounts

He did run like crap in all in situations, but the percentages he was pointing out in his "notepad" study would've indicated things were far far worse than they actually were. Let's say though that despite that, he really was able to detect that he was running below expectation overall. Well, giving him the benefit of the doubt on that, who's more likely to show up in this thread to claim the games are rigged? Him or somebody who's running better than expectation by the same margin?

In any case, spade correctly pointed out that these results weren't designed to test the overall legitimacy of the games (unless of course AMEC's stated percentages really were correct and he was a major outlier).

Point is though if everybody ran like AMEC, we'd still uncover online poker being rigged. We have 370k hands where he's winning 0.8% less often than he should. That equates to between 1 and 2 standard deviations. Let's say we had 3.7 million hands instead of 370k, and we were 0.8% off at that point. How many standard deviations are we talking now? What about 37 million hands?

This is what makes spade's study so relevant. We know that 1 in 18 times somebody will run as badly as AMEC in all in situations. But you take thousands of those 370k hands samples and all of a sudden now you can test to a much greater degree of certainty.

EDIT: If it's 1 in 18 to run that badly over a 370k sample, I believe that would make it 1 in 324 to run that badly over two consecutive 370k hand samples (assuming the same # of all ins). To run that badly in three 370k hand samples? 1 in 5832. You see how the further we go, we have more certainty as to whether or not something is wrong?

I'm not sure why you think we care if you become a customer or not. Rigtards will always have a reason to distrust. If I was you I'd just not use the nasty internets.

Why not?

It's never bothered you when using any of your other gimmick accounts?

These are not the statistics you're looking for.




Move along.

Weird qu. Ask anyone with >100k HH say and PT3/HEM tells you how their pocket cards frequency matches up with expectation. Or see how many 1000s breakeven-winning players have had many years happy playing without cause to suspect anything.
Shouldn't this be in the poker is rigged conspiracy thread.

I think you are confusing effect size, and significance.

How noticeable it is depends on the effect size, or how many hands per X are we off. He ran worse than average by by losing one extra all-in hand per 124 all-ins played. Looking at his total hands that was 0.24 hands/1000 or 2.4 hands/10K or 24 hands/100K. That's the effect size, and my point is that this is imperceptible unless you're the rain man.

The significance on the other hand, is what determines how unusual the offset is, or how far from the normal mean. That's measured in standard deviations. The size of 1 standard deviation goes up with the square root of the sample size. So on this sample size of 9550 all-in hands we had 1.6 standard deviations, which is not statistically significant. Usually the borderline to consider it even interesting is 2 SD. Now, let's double the sample size to 19K all-in hands. If we had exactly the same effect size and we had the same average equity we now have a greater significance. The offset from the mean goes up by the sqrt of 2 (we doubled) so now our offset is 2.2 SD. And so instead of saying that 1 person in 18 would have worse luck (using a single tail distribution) now we would say that 1 person in 72 has worse luck. And that's with just doubling our lone sample. If it were two independent random samples instead of one doubled, we get some extra significance from that too.

Now lets get 10 random player samples of this size (they can't be self-selected run-bads), and they all have the same effect. Just 10 players. If they all have this same effect size, now we're at 5SD from the mean. And that's a level that can't be explained by luck or chance in this population. What we'd expect is to only find one sample in 18 that was at least this unlucky.

What I want to know from those who are suspicious: How is it being rigged? In general, all I get is dozens of different speculations, all of which don't even make sense. The person making the claim is generally either a losing player who simply can't (and may never will) beat online poker for their stakes. The most notable quality of this person is that they're simply not very intelligent. I'll bet my net worth (not that it's astronomically high or anything) that the avg. IQ of those who believe it's rigged is much lower than those who don't. Not saying there's something wrong with being skeptical, but if you're only getting suspicious when you're on a downswing, that should tell you something right there.

Afaik a poker room makes profit through RAKE, so there is no reason to manipulate the probabilities of hitting draws/sets, getting dealt AA etc. The Room would have no benefit by manipulating this, and it was way too obvious if they did. Therefore, these numbers surely will be accurate.

But I guess the rooms could be VERY interested in generating huge pots, so I was pretty interested in the regarding numbers. How often play made hand vs draws, or draws vs draws? How often do setups like AA vs QQ or overpair vs set appear? This was easy to manipulate without taking effect of how often one gets dealt and wins with KK i.e. or how often draws hit., but it was obv very hard to detect. Also, which starting hand wins the most money (regardless of win percentage which still will be ~80% for AA)? Is it AA or 87s?

I guess you'll need a sample of >100M, maybe billions of hands - and a program that shows these numbers; sth like HoldemAnalytics, but with more functions (why aren't these functions implemented yet?). Btw if an 'official' poker analytics software developer would do this investigation I'm pretty sure the rooms would bring a lot of action against him, meaning he would lose his income/job. So this was a job for a random nerd/hacker having nothin to lose.

Maybe one day someone creates such a tool and has millions of hand historys and comes here with the results. I hope so, regardless of whether the result states the games to be rigged or not.

Analyzing preflop all-ins and draw-hitting probabilities is obv pretty senseless if you think about. You guys think the wrong direction imo.


/e: damn no, I didn't want to post itt...^^

its definitely rigged for some people...nothing you can say would convince me otherwise unless u gave me money

It's been shown many times that this would probably reduce rake.

Not at low/micro limits afaik.

But I really don't want to get involved in this discussion, therefore I'm actually not up to date what was stated itt so far, and I'm not going to be^^.

It would reduce rake by busting people faster, which would be even more true at micros, where it's tough to reach the rake cap without being all in.

If they boosted hands to make pots bigger, it'd be between 100 and 600 NL, because below that requires all ins that bust people, and above that it's pointless since a raise and a caller cap the rake.

Yes. And anything that increases the variance will cause more people to bust, and some portion of busted players will not redeposit, or not do so immediately. If someone else has that money he is only churning rake 1/2 as fast as when two people have that money. The maximum rake solution is with lowest variance and slow movement of money back and forth between players, so the money churns until the rake eats it up without busting anyone first. You can only increase rake by having more players in seats on a 24/7 averaged basis. Bigger pots won't accomplish that. And of course you have the caps too.

Wat.

Yeah pretty hard to understand when you do that

Sorry, I should have added the quotes you were referencing. Now I get it*

*wait...wat?

Fat kids are definitely rigged imo (parents ldo)

You forgot



and

Lethal Weapon 1 and 2 were legit. Lethal Weapon 3 and 4 were rigged by Rene Russo.

I win.

^ that's not real (is it?)

PokerStars Game #41066426516: Tournament #252048016, $5.00+$0.20 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2010/03/12 17:26:34 ET
Table '252048016 1' 10-max Seat #8 is the button
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (1500 in chips)
Seat 2: huskybear (1490 in chips)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 (1170 in chips)
Seat 4: kent_72 (1450 in chips)
Seat 5: xxxRedneck87 (1960 in chips)
Seat 6: alejo2347 (1590 in chips)
Seat 7: kuklatank (1450 in chips)
Seat 8: radja82 (1550 in chips)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (1360 in chips)
Seat 10: drug wars (1480 in chips)
m!sscl!ck: posts small blind 15
drug wars: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to drug wars [6c 6d]
Big Broth555: folds
huskybear: folds
amazinmets73: folds
kent_72: folds
xxxRedneck87: raises 120 to 150
alejo2347: folds
kuklatank: folds
radja82: folds
m!sscl!ck: folds
drug wars: calls 120
*** FLOP *** [9c Ad 3c]
drug wars: checks
xxxRedneck87: bets 150
drug wars: folds
Uncalled bet (150) returned to xxxRedneck87
xxxRedneck87 collected 315 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 315 | Rake 0
Board [9c Ad 3c]
Seat 1: Big Broth555 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: huskybear folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: kent_72 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: xxxRedneck87 collected (315)
Seat 6: alejo2347 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: kuklatank folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: radja82 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 10: drug wars (big blind) folded on the Flop

PokerStars Game #41066510579: Tournament #252048016, $5.00+$0.20 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2010/03/12 17:28:15 ET
Table '252048016 1' 10-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (1455 in chips)
Seat 2: huskybear (1430 in chips)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 (1170 in chips)
Seat 4: kent_72 (1450 in chips)
Seat 5: xxxRedneck87 (2125 in chips)
Seat 6: alejo2347 (1605 in chips)
Seat 7: kuklatank (1450 in chips)
Seat 8: radja82 (1520 in chips)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (1345 in chips)
Seat 10: drug wars (1450 in chips)
huskybear: posts small blind 15
amazinmets73: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to drug wars [6d 6c]
kent_72: raises 30 to 60
xxxRedneck87: raises 60 to 120
alejo2347: raises 1485 to 1605 and is all-in
kuklatank: folds
radja82: folds
m!sscl!ck: folds
drug wars: folds
Big Broth555: folds
huskybear: folds
amazinmets73: folds
kent_72: folds
xxxRedneck87: calls 1485
*** FLOP *** [6h 9s 9c]
*** TURN *** [6h 9s 9c] [Qd]
*** RIVER *** [6h 9s 9c Qd] [Ah]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
xxxRedneck87: shows [Js Ks] (a pair of Nines)
alejo2347: shows [Ad As] (a full house, Aces full of Nines)
alejo2347 collected 3315 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3315 | Rake 0
Board [6h 9s 9c Qd Ah]
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: huskybear (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: amazinmets73 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: kent_72 folded before Flop
Seat 5: xxxRedneck87 showed [Js Ks] and lost with a pair of Nines
Seat 6: alejo2347 showed [Ad As] and won (3315) with a full house, Aces full of Nines
Seat 7: kuklatank folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: radja82 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: drug wars folded before Flop (didn't bet)

PokerStars Game #41066645775: Tournament #252048016, $5.00+$0.20 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level III (25/50) - 2010/03/12 17:30:58 ET
Table '252048016 1' 10-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (1395 in chips)
Seat 2: huskybear (1415 in chips)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 (1125 in chips)
Seat 4: kent_72 (1510 in chips)
Seat 5: xxxRedneck87 (490 in chips)
Seat 6: alejo2347 (3255 in chips)
Seat 7: kuklatank (1450 in chips)
Seat 8: radja82 (1565 in chips)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (1345 in chips)
Seat 10: drug wars (1450 in chips)
Big Broth555: posts the ante 5
huskybear: posts the ante 5
amazinmets73: posts the ante 5
kent_72: posts the ante 5
xxxRedneck87: posts the ante 5
alejo2347: posts the ante 5
kuklatank: posts the ante 5
radja82: posts the ante 5
m!sscl!ck: posts the ante 5
drug wars: posts the ante 5
xxxRedneck87: posts small blind 25
alejo2347: posts big blind 50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to drug wars [6d 6c]
kuklatank: folds
radja82: folds
m!sscl!ck: folds
drug wars: calls 50
Big Broth555: folds
huskybear: folds
amazinmets73: folds
kent_72: folds
xxxRedneck87: raises 435 to 485 and is all-in
alejo2347: folds
drug wars: calls 435
*** FLOP *** [3h 7d 4h]
*** TURN *** [3h 7d 4h] [Jd]
*** RIVER *** [3h 7d 4h Jd] [2h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
xxxRedneck87: shows [4d 5d] (a pair of Fours)
drug wars: shows [6d 6c] (a pair of Sixes)
drug wars collected 1070 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1070 | Rake 0
Board [3h 7d 4h Jd 2h]
Seat 1: Big Broth555 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: huskybear folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: kent_72 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: xxxRedneck87 (small blind) showed [4d 5d] and lost with a pair of Fours
Seat 6: alejo2347 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 7: kuklatank folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: radja82 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: drug wars showed [6d 6c] and won (1070) with a pair of Sixes

PokerStars Game #41067318830: Tournament #252048016, $5.00+$0.20 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level V (75/150) - 2010/03/12 17:44:31 ET
Table '252048016 1' 10-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (745 in chips)
Seat 2: huskybear (1895 in chips)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 (620 in chips)
Seat 4: kent_72 (1795 in chips)
Seat 6: alejo2347 (1625 in chips)
Seat 7: kuklatank (1530 in chips)
Seat 8: radja82 (1330 in chips)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (1120 in chips)
Seat 10: drug wars (4340 in chips)
Big Broth555: posts the ante 15
huskybear: posts the ante 15
amazinmets73: posts the ante 15
kent_72: posts the ante 15
alejo2347: posts the ante 15
kuklatank: posts the ante 15
radja82: posts the ante 15
m!sscl!ck: posts the ante 15
drug wars: posts the ante 15
kuklatank: posts small blind 75
radja82: posts big blind 150
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to drug wars [6h 6d]
m!sscl!ck: folds
drug wars: raises 150 to 300
Big Broth555: folds
huskybear: folds
amazinmets73: folds
kent_72: folds
alejo2347: raises 1310 to 1610 and is all-in
kuklatank: folds
radja82: folds
drug wars: folds
Uncalled bet (1310) returned to alejo2347
alejo2347 collected 960 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 960 | Rake 0
Seat 1: Big Broth555 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: huskybear folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: kent_72 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: alejo2347 (button) collected (960)
Seat 7: kuklatank (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 8: radja82 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: drug wars folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #41067420726: Tournament #252048016, $5.00+$0.20 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level VI (100/200) - 2010/03/12 17:46:36 ET
Table '252048016 1' 10-max Seat #9 is the button
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (695 in chips)
Seat 2: huskybear (1845 in chips)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 (570 in chips)
Seat 4: kent_72 (1745 in chips)
Seat 6: alejo2347 (2235 in chips)
Seat 7: kuklatank (1405 in chips)
Seat 8: radja82 (830 in chips)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (1300 in chips)
Seat 10: drug wars (4375 in chips)
Big Broth555: posts the ante 20
huskybear: posts the ante 20
amazinmets73: posts the ante 20
kent_72: posts the ante 20
alejo2347: posts the ante 20
kuklatank: posts the ante 20
radja82: posts the ante 20
m!sscl!ck: posts the ante 20
drug wars: posts the ante 20
drug wars: posts small blind 100
Big Broth555: posts big blind 200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to drug wars [6h 6s]
drug wars said, "this is SICK!"
huskybear: raises 600 to 800
amazinmets73: folds
kent_72: folds
alejo2347: folds
kuklatank: folds
radja82: folds
m!sscl!ck: folds
drug wars said, "I'VE BEEN DEALT FIVE POCKET 6'S THIS GAME"
drug wars said, "FIVE!!"
drug wars: folds
Big Broth555: folds
Uncalled bet (600) returned to huskybear
huskybear collected 680 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 680 | Rake 0
Seat 1: Big Broth555 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: huskybear collected (680)
Seat 3: amazinmets73 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: kent_72 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: alejo2347 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: kuklatank folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: radja82 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: m!sscl!ck (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: drug wars (small blind) folded before Flop


Sure seemed rigged to me..