I don't need statistics when I've experienced many rushes in live games. Those rushes at limit online poker rarely came, other then those times before when I started cashing out way back before the US legislation. But that's a whole other thread.

Keviln, have you ever played Diablo I online? Holy **** talk about rigged....Everywhere you go there's dupers, town kills, diablo clones, apocalypse books...it's just ridiculous. Be thankful PokerStars doesn't use computer to computer TCP/IP connections with everything hosted locally!

No stats? I'm shocked! Really, I am!!

Well, since many of us DO have online stats that are fine, are you going to be enquiring with the B&M casinos about their rigged decks then?

Also, what did you think of my session that had perfectly normal stats? I have lots more just like it! I guess it's just FR games where winning 3 in a row is below the norm? Why is that?

It came from technology, no New Jersey style Gaming Boards, overseas companies, and a large portion of the population who never played much live poker and thus can't compare online poker with it.

But, don't get me wrong, you can lose your ass at live poker too.

If you think you're getting a fair shake, fine. If you enjoy the entertainment value, fine. Just don't plan on making any serious money online. Johnny Chan from what I heard owns six houses. He didn't do it online, I can guarantee you that.

I don't think I'm getting a fair shake, I know I am.

I use actual hard numbers to come to these conclusions. I don't rely on observations, recollections, or how the stars align today. Cold, hard facts. That's all I need. I don't really give a **** how Johnny Chan bought his six houses, and I have no ****ing idea how this relates to the discussion at hand.

It's a shame everyone else on these boards is sick and tired of hearing these arguments and can't be bothered to share any FR stats with you, but they probably suspect the same thing as I do...they wouldn't do a thing to change your mind.

You still haven't answered these questions:

1) If we are all satisfied that the number of 3-in-a-row winners online is within the statistical expectations, proven by actual statistics, are you going to look into why it isn't the same at B&M casinos?

2) How do you explain the fact that my SH statistics appear to be fine? Do they only rig FR play?

kev - You are the one who thinks you can 'just tell' how the cards you are supposed to run just by looking.

I've played a fair amount of live but not too much becuase 30 hands an hour kind of bores me.
I've played over 1 million hands of online poker. Again, no biggie. I have played online for more than 2 years, both limit and NL.
I'm not sure what exactly you are 'predicting'. You are trying to 'predict' how much I have already played? Predictions are for things that are going to happen in the future. Not for things that have already happened.

People have actually tried to legitimately help you understand some of this stuff.
Yes, you really can win 3 hands in a row online or go on other 'rushes' and it happens all the freaking time. Maybe play some more online or something? Really don't know what to tell you other than that.
You say that it just never happens and other people are telling you that it happens all the time and they've seen it happen. So now you choose not to believe them or something.

One's memories tends to play tricks on them when they try to identify patterns from live play or online.
I briefly had a job dealing blackjack. The number of times some player would speak concretely about some sort of 'pattern' they were almost always wrong.

"Geez, he's gotten blackjack 5 times in a row!!"
ummm, no. I've gotten blackjack 2 times in the last 4 hands. I got it on this hand...but the hand before I busted and you won and I paid you but evidently you forgot that, and a couple hands before that I had 19 and beat your 18.

Stuff like that.
Anyway, you seem pretty determined to stick with your belief that winning rushes are somehow rare or near-impossible online somehow. I, and several others, think you are being incredibly ridiculous and some have even tried to help you.

Since you like hard numbers what would you estimate is the number of times you should win 3 hands in a row at showdown if you play a lot of hands and are in a 8 player game where the average is 4 players a hand seeing the flop? Anyone else can also answer this.

Well all I can say to all you people out there reading this. If you've ever cashed out over 3 times on the same site don't plan on winning 3 in row at limit poker in a 8 handed game in hands where you don't raise. I just don't believe it can happen from my experience. Even though I figure it should happen at least once every 300 hands.

In a 10 handed table, odds of 3 in a row are 1-1000, but only on the first hand dealt.

After that it is 1-100. (For any player to win 3).

Some of those factors make it very hard to calculate. Obviously the average expectation, taking out any other factors, would be 1/8 * 1/8 * 1/8 = 1/512.

Do you mean winning 3 hands in a row as they are dealt? Or do you mean 3 consecutive hands where you go to showdown, regardless of any hands in between?

We can easily calculate this given the relevant data (e.g. WTS%). What's your point here? Do you even know what you're actually getting playing live poker? What's your sample size? What about your online stats - what's your number / sample size there? How big is the discrepancy?

Get us your 2 results first and then we can calculate the mathematically expected value together and then we'll see what is broken here: online play, live play, or Keviln.

Post your complete HH imo.

Also where did you get the 300 hands number from? Out of your arse?

I missed this gem earlier.

First of all, I don't think prediction means what you think it means.

Secondly, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Wrong.

That's exactly where it came from. It was 1/200 earlier, until I showed him it should be 1 in 500-1000 depending on the number of players. Now it's moved up to 300. It should be 500 soon.

Much like there were no rushes in online poker, then almost no rushes in online poker, and then almost no rushes in full ring online poker, since I showed there were in shorthanded.

Anytime I point these things out and try to get him to respond, he ignores them and moves on to something new which he is incorrect about.

Sorrym you are wrong.

I have cashed out dozens of times on Stars and also on Party back in the day.
And quite a few other times on various other sites.
Literally dozens of times. As is the case for many players here.
And I win 3 in a row quite frequently.

So now you are saying that not winning 3 in a row is also somehow related to a cashout curse?
We need to address one conspiracy theory at a time and you keep bringing different ideas into the mix so that's kind of difficult to do here.

I would like to congratulate everyone in this thread for making it one of the longest conspiracy theory threads in a long time. I give 5 stars.

gt - Man...back in the day we had these ALL the time and they would get WAY longer than this.
Incredibly it does seem that people really are getting better educated on this stuff.

Way fewer posters in 2004 and way MORE serious discussion of action-flops and cashout-curses, etc etc.

For the most part, people really DO seem to be figuring it out somehow.
There are exceptions of course [cough cough...OP]

Holy **** Sherlock!

Youre watching 8 other players, and youre seeing more streaks!! But online (only watching yourself) streaks dont happen as often!!

SOMEONE CALL THE POKER POLICE HES ON TO SOMETHING!!!

Look lets just tell it how it is. Kevlin, you are not a good poker player, you can make a few bucks at the soft live games but when you thought youd come and clean up online you lost your ass. And now, like all those other people that cant take any personal responsibility for their actions, you want to believe that its not that you suck, but that the game is rigged. Well sorry, but it is just the case that you are not as good at poker as you like to think. Nothing to be ashamed about. I remember when I first started online a few years back I won for about an hour at 3-6 limit, said to myself lol im gunna be rich, moved up to 15-30 and was busto in time for tea. We've all been there in the beginning. The thing is, are you smart enough to realize you just arent nearly as good as you think you are? Are you smart enough to realize you sound very stupid right now?

If this is all a joke you are playing, well, its pretty old and boring this sort of thing. Its not difficult to start a new account and pretend to be stupid and drive other forum members mad. Anyone of us could do it, its just that its a tired old gag. A bit pathetic now really without something original in the joke.

But Bob would win even MORE in live poker with all those extra rushes!

Our House - I never get the kind of rushes in live poker as I do in online. I'm pretty sure live poker is rigged.


[actually, I recall some session of limit poker where I zipped up a nice 100BB win or so including flopped quads against a full-boat, spiking a set on the river...and also getting dealt AA and KK within my first orbit].

Keviln,

May I really blow your mind?

If you're playing online, the deck is shuffled way more thoroughly than you could ever hope for in a real game.

To put it in terms you would be more likely to understand: Online poker is "more fair" than live poker.

Yup.

For a bernoulli trial you will win n hands in a row on average every A hands where

A = (p^(-n) - 1) / (1-p)

(Source: Any good stats book. Online I found it here: http://people.ccmr.cornell.edu/~ginsparg/INFO295/mh.pdf )

If you win your fair share of hands in an 8 handed game, p = 0.125 and with n = 3 you get A = 584.

For a 7-handed game A = 399
6-handed A = 258
5-handed A = 155

But who cares about that math stuff - my gut feeling is so much more reliable.

lol

Has anyone ever managed to convince someone like OP that they are wrong?

Or is it always like talking to a brick wall?