And Oxford physics professors will always have answers to your physics questions.

What, exactly, is your point?

You have posted no facts in this thread of any relevance whatsoever.

You continue to post childish rubbish like this because your "opinions" are completely worthless due your apparent stupidity.

You continue to ignore the intelligent responses to your stupidity because you are unable to understand them.

You are still unable to carry out a simple analysis of your own hands because you are either too stupid or too lazy.

You continue to delude yourself about your poker ability and have to blame somebody rather than accept that poker isn't the easy money you wish it was.


Pooflinger zero. Pooflinger forever zero.

I'm pretty certain that Poofinger is a gimmick account of a perfectly sensible 2+2 poster who just uses it to have a laugh from time to time.

my feeling is that it's naive to think the RNG's are perfectly random because if you think about the way the seed number is generated then it can't be random

basically the seed is generated by a mathematical formula and then randomized using what is called thermal noise which is random

so like if you take a number, say, 6 and do a whole bunch of random operations on it, -2 here a +3 there then it will land on some number that is unpredictable but not random

that's the real key to it the sites want unpredictably they don't necessarily need it to be perfectly random they need it to be unpredictable so that no one with a smart program sees your hole cards

so the upshot is that no one runs perfectly at expectation even over large sample sizes but there is no cashout curse or whatever, the sites have zero to gain from giving you a disadvantage and everything to gain from making it fair for all players

there may or may not be more bad beats onlline but everyone takes exactly the same amount of bad beats

I am not sure what to do with this statement. Do you mean that over a very large sample of hands everyone will eventually take exactly the same amount of bad beats? So everyone's stats (just the cards and how they play out, not the money won or lost) will be exactly the same if we all play 10 billion hands each? I cant see how this would actually be true because some players fold, some players re raise and out play other players, etc.

no. modern hardware RNGs are truly random.

the thermal noise IS the seed. and since thermal noise is entirely random, the output is as well.

I am interested in how a computer generated deal could possibly "Feel" different to a player who has played a very significant number of live games as it pertains to a random number generator and a human being shuffling.

I wonder if the human brain on a subconscious level could be noticing the actual non randomness of the RNG. This may even be more focused for players who play less tables. Maybe this is why Multi-tabling works so well? It seems like the brain can be tricked into hyper focusing more on other matters in the game and not on the presentation of scenarios and the results of just the one table? Multi-tabling would be like adding another several layers of perceived randomness to trick the brain into believing that it is in fact random. In essence, overloading that part of your awareness.

Maybe that gut feeling players get when they pick up certain hands is in fact the non randomness at work. Intuition if you have experienced it in a positive and powerful way over the course of your life is very real. I don't think there is magic at work when someone uses intuition, (although I do believe that we are all spirit/energy first and foremost) I think it is the sum of all of the experiences in your life (or lives) sorting out the possibilities for you. The brain is not a one dimensional calculator, there is much more going on with the process of experience than most people could even imagine.

The "gut feeling" is cognitive bias(es).

I'm not sure if that's correct or not

they may have advanced the technology but I didn't trust online poker when i first started playing so i researched it a little and asked some math dudes i knew if it was possible to deal out a truly random shuffle and to a man they said no...there are no known ways to generate a random number that is perfectly random, however this was probably 10 years ago...

I played on WSEX back in 1999 (I am nearly certain i was the first person in this forum to play poker online since i beta tested thier software) and it was stupidly non random and quite obvious...there was a flush nearly every other hand

Then i tried Party Poker and that was obviously flawed too because I remember sitting at a table one time where there was a flopped set on 10 or 11 straight hands...It was plainly obvious to me it wasn't random the amount of flopped sets was way above expectation (no data collection or anything i'm just reporting what i thought i saw)

I also played at Paradise Poker and i didn't think it was random either but i don't know the software was too slow to keep me interested

This is going to sound a little wierd but after playing on Poker Stars for about a year and a half I have noticed some "tendencies" in the program...I don't do any analysis coz i'm just too lazy but I think there are less flopped sets than what would be expected, and there are some other things but all in all it does play very close to real cards but i still don't think it plays exactly like a random shuffle

a disclaimer on all this is that i've won money on all the sites but if i didn't i would probably claim it was rigged to coz it sure can seem that way sometimes and it makes it easier to take losing by thinking it is

i'd love to hear someone who designs or has programmed an rng tho

Exploiting a vulnerability is one thing. That had to be designed and coded and ogtten past at least 1 other department in testing.

There you have it, admission of shill. An oxford physics professor is in fact an oxford professoer and would admit so, so your comparison to one makes it very clear. Close the thread, its all been proven.

wat

this is a pretty intresting paragraph even if it has nothing to do with poker..made me think about some stuff not related to poker...thanks for writing this

When someone says this it is immediately evident that they have no logical ability to even think. I dont even care if the sites are rigged. I just care that this one statement is repeated by so many of the accused shills that there is no way I can take anyone saying it. How can anyone with basic arithmetic skills or the ability to tie their own shoes really truly think this? Rigged or not this statement is 100% false.

Too complex for you, move along.

Yes, I struggle to comprehend moronic statements. My apologies. Head asplode.

I agree, you are struggling. You should leave the thread. 98% of your posts are in this thread and you have yet to say anything orginal or of any value whatsoever. All you do is call people names and repeat what the smart people say. You have done ZERO of your own thinking. You should have been banned already, all you do is insult members on this site.

I have not designed or programmed an RNG but I have read about them. I'd recommend that you do some reading on your own rather than relying on what "some math guy" told you ten years ago.

In the early days of poker pseudo-RNGs were used. The problem with those is that if you figure out the seed, you can know the outcome. If you don't know the seed however, and the seed is something that will by nature change randomly (for example using miliseconds from a system clock), they are still technically random.

Planet Poker used a pseudo-RNG for their deal, and Cigital Inc noticed a flaw in it that made hands predictable (I think some result from the last hand was used as a seed or something like that).

That's the only case that is known so I highly doubt that there have been poker rooms that have used some sort of non-random deal that was easily detectable by observation alone and that this would not have become publicly known yet.

Nowadays hardware RNGs are used where there is no seed in the traditional sense, instead the input is something not generated by a computer like thermal noise that have been proved to be completely random.

That said, if you think something is going on, it would be very easy to test (not by me) if you can provide hand histories.

Number of posts by Nfuego in this thread: 503
Total number of posts by Nfuego: 2994

Percentage: 17%

Another fine example of riggie math at work.

Now run the numbers for the past 6 months only.

There are many ways to get to the result of "random".

If u put one foot in a bucket of ice and one in fire, it ends up just as normal temperature in average, as if u were in your livingroom.

That's funny you ninja edited from 3 months. In any event, I'm not going to go page by page and neither did you. However I did do his last 25 posts: 11/25 for 44%.

Variance.

There you go. Super original. 50th time in this thread? BRAVO MATE. Now sit back and enjoy as everyone marvels at your wit. Someone might even respnd with an "lol". Then youll be in heaven! I have bad news for you Nfuego. Your own kids think your lame.