thank you for posting this

I'm very worried that missing CO's could be going to players with losing samples now...

Its unfortunate that most players with losing samples are unlikely to browse poker forums or are unlikely to want to post their samples but it would be great if more people could come forward. I think for now we have really put a good amount of evidence out and now its up to Party to prove that they are not deliberately giving recreational players CO's and BTN's to keep game circulation and attract players to continue playing on their site. Everyone wants to give these guys the benefit of the doubt even though the amount of shady stuff that most if not all of these big poker sites have participated in in the past is unreal.

Nothing will happen unless there is significant coverage. There is enough evidence for someone who cares enough, I assume PP regs, to contact some poker/sport press.

And of course the whole point of this is to keep losing players "lose rate" from being to high and winning players win rate from being too high so that both groups of players play on the site for longer, therefore more rake for them.

Hey Guys,

Haven't played on Party in quite some time but saw this and figured I look if I can help.

This is from late 2019 until mid 2020 roughly. 96k hands 100ff and 21k hands 200ff:

5 handed


4handed


3handed


100ff was winning, 200ff was losing and overall was losing ~2,5k on the given samplesize.

Hope this helps and best of luck getting this sorted!

thx for this

i fear the COs going somewhere now, but theres uncertainty about whether the people who are getting them would ever publicly post here as they clearly have figured out a way to abuse this bad coding and the system to increase their winrates.

Hi, this is the first time I post here. Saw this thread and thought I would share my results. Been playing 100FF for like 5 months now, and have a 350k hand sample. I use PokerTracker4.

(posted 3 images of the results here but the images wont show!! ill type them instead)

6 handed (around 127k hands):
SB: 21172
BB: 21287
EP: 21477
MP: 21281
CO: 20740
BU: 21249

5 handed (around 200k hands):
SB: 39691
BB: 40255
MP: 40283
CO: 39547
BU: 40012

4 handed (around 16k hands):
SB: 4204
BB: 4206
CO: 3946
BU: 4242

upload them on gyazo or smth, thanks man

It would make total sense from a shady casino site, to give loosing players more buttons / Co positions. And the amount of people posted, is really concerning. I have a 50k sample for FF plo which I will post later and see. Would be interesting to know if this is only the case for nl FF.

I think Party deserves the benefit of their doubt. Given the observably quality of their software, I can absolutely imagine a bug of some sort rather than an intentional scheme that would on the whole net very little to their rake, but can sink their business if discovered. Whatever the explanation, at the very least it doesn't speak well of the controls and regulations, whatever they are.

Let's say this is true....

Most of the players getting the extra CO position are clueless that they are being given an advantage, and most played with the extra CO are long term.losing players who keep depositing funds, where as most(if not all) of the players who get robbed of the CO regularly with draw funds.

Again, assuming this is the case, I think the motives are clear. They can be reasonably sure that despite this advantage the players with extra COs will still lose their funds and make another deposit (but possibly lose at a slightly lower rate). The real advantage for the 'casino' is to limit the winning players win rate, thus limiting the amount and/or frequency of withdraws from those players....and perhaps discouraging from playing at all.

The only way a poker site makes money is by continually getting new deposits. It is in their interest to make those who frequently deposit funds happy. Winning players costs the site everytime they make a withdraw so again it is their interest to limit the frequency and amount of those withdraws.

We know sites are supposed to segregate funds and only use the rake to fund their operations, pay employees, advertise, ect; As we have seen in the past, not all sites do this. If a site is doing something shady like this, it makes me think they are in financial trouble and looking for ways to cut expenses and they may have dipped into player funds.

I don't think anyone is having trouble understanding how it would benefit a site to be doing this on purpose; the question is whether that's what is happening. Or if anything is happening at all, or if there is a hand history/tracking glitch.

To that end - is there a reason no one is able to post the entire population results for their databases? I would assume that would allow us to see if there is even distribution at hands at every position, and thus know that this has nothing to do with an error in the data itself. I understand the anonymous names means we can't see which individual players have skewed numbers, but I would think data from the entire population should still be obtainable, shouldn't it?

It's probably me being dumb, but I'm not sure exactly what you're asking given that you understand the anonymous HH thing. Every time a hand is dealt there's a player at each position though.

But I think it's past the point where it could be an error in the data itself because multiple players claiming to have losing samples have posted their DB with extra cutoff hands. I think it's highly unlikely for all the database samples posted so far to be a coincidence.

Edit: I think I know what you mean now but I'm trying to think if there'd be a way to see this from a DB in the way the party hands are uploaded. I don't think there would be because it's just going to show all the other players as player 1, player 2, etc.

edit #2: possibly it'd work if you sort by all 4 handed hands individually, all 5 handed hands individually etc and then see if # of hands played from each position are the same. not totally sure this would work. but for sure it won't work for the entire database without filtering for same # of players per hand individually.

It could well be me, as it's been years since I've used PokerTracker, so I'll try to better explain what I mean so hopefully someone can point out why it won't work if that's the case.

All the hand histories for a session are downloaded, and in a database. The only player that can be identified is "Hero"; everyone else is just an anonymous name. But - isn't there a way to show the totals for that session, for all players?

Yes, this is what I meant, thanks!

When it comes right down to it, we really don't have a lot of samples yet. We have a couple of large samples, a couple smaller ones, and quite a few anecdotes. We've also had a couple of people that are finding the opposite. But I actually find those make the case for this being a problem a little more compelling - if the cases were ALL showing the same bias, a data anomaly is a little more likely. Having some show bias in the other direction makes me lean a little more to there being a problem.

Giving an edge in positional advantage to losing players makes some sense, albeit a bit naughty.

Sites don't make money by players depositing. All else being equal, a site with fewer withdrawals and fewer deposits would make more money. Sites profit from rake, and reducing the edge between players results in more rake.

It's ridiculous to conclude that if this is how the Zoom games work that they could be in financial trouble! And ridiculous to think this has any implications for the segregation of players' funds!

Tried running this for ignition. Only by position for hero. Player not hero, report is blank.

Wouldn't the report, if it was possible, just show each position as (total hands x players)-(hero's hands at that position) for each spot?

Not for anonymous site.

Player names change with each table in fast fold on ignition. Don't think Player 1 is always Player 1 on Party FF. Same problem. You can't get static statistics.

What he's saying is if you have 80,000 hands and you have 15,000 cutoff hands, all the other players cutoff hands should add up to 65,000.

A poker site that segregates it's player pool based on winrates without informing the players doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...nrate-1305468/

Im playing last ~13 months only partypoker I havent used once holdem manager to check anything, but for the purpose of this thread I looked in last 40k( can download only last 50k in last 40days)

Pretty obvious what's going on here. Has anyone asked any site pro's to comment on this?

I think you guys need to give PartyPoker a bit more credit, they have been one of the longest-running sites with a pretty great reputation. I play a lot on the site but mainly 1 table fast forward 25NL.

I was a bit interested, here is my sample size of roughly 50k hands of fast forward on PartyPoker.



If you guys are onto something perhaps its when playing 4+ tables of fast forward?

its hard to give credit when i just posted 3 SBs in a row at 500ff yesterday while trying to sitout next bb, and then didnt even get to play the button.

Something is clearly wrong here but I give like 10% that Party is doing this intentionally. It just isn't worth the risk for a business this big.

Edit. Or Party knows that this is easy to brush under the carpet as a software error and the risk of getting serious consequences is close to zero. I could easily have too much faith in Party, we'll probably never know the truth.