FYP

i wish they would explain the deck matrix .
this site looks rigged now

I reserved judgment until playing several thousand hands.... and We''ll Gene is pretty full of it..

Ok how hard would it be fore approval by the "isle of man laboratories".... If I've played several thousand hands since this soft launch wouldn't they have a big enough of a sample to prove what ever they have to prove?

Why haven't they set up Affiliate programs?

Why even use a SKIN? How hard is it to get a coder to license an client and come up with a new client?

I went to the Isle of Man gaming site, or whatever link was put up. I emailed them asking if RD was in fact going through the validating process. Here was their response.


Dear Mr XXXX,

I can confirm that Realdealpoker are currently going through the final
stages of their licensing process.

Once this is complete they will be added to our website and they will be
allowed to take cash deposits from customers.

Regards,

Colm Andrew
Senior Inspector

Does anybody want to take my hand histories to try to prove that this guy is in fact using a RNG?

Are you Del Boy's Rodney?

Downloaded the .net thing. Made for XP, beta. Runs - but no one is on. Prediction: slow traffic death.

Not sure what you mean here.

To most thinking people, a good RNG is preferable to these shuffling machines, and certainly vastly superior to any home-brew non-random "Deck Matrix" scheme to generate many decks out of each shuffle.

It would indeed be funny if they actually did use a RNG and the machines were just a marketing tool to attract the rigtards, but that is nothing to worry about in itself.

What IS worrying is that the "Deck Matrix" thingie is likely to be total crap and a prime candidate to actually be rigged.

Good luck to this site if it thinks keeping riggies believing it is legit long term is possible. The riggie belief system is based on needing every site to be rigged. This one will be no different.

Silly business model given their target market.

did anyone who's playing on RDP already had bad beat?

I hope you are being sarcastic, as this perfectly epitomizes the absurdity of rigtard expectations. These unrealistic expectations are going to be the downfall of this site, as nobody is going to find what they are looking for there, and the backlash is likely to be even worse than normal rigtardism on other sites.

can someone explain how this matrix works?

This is very true.

1) The site is designed specifically to attract rigtards.

2) Rigtards are known to be extremely resistant to logic and evidence.

3) Rigtards ascribe the results of their poor poker skills to rigging of the deal.

4) Rigtards will not play any better* at realdeal.

5) Rigtards will ascribe the results of their poor poker skill to rigging at realdeal.

6) Since virtually all realdeal's players will be rigtards that means that virtually all realdeal's customers will think their deal is rigged.


* Of course a few of the better rigtards will be able to have it both ways. Although they'll still say the site is rigged they will point to the fact that they run better there than at other sites (because, of course, they are only playing other rigtards).

Actually, looking at that last paragraph, maybe it would be worth playing there as with the concentration of low skill rigtards it would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

All the decks generated by the dealing machines are fed into a giant flux-capacitor which shuffles their temporal anomalies and provides the decks for play.

Or something like that.

I thought this stuff was patented. Saying it's proprietary doesn't mean it can't be discussed.

Maybe what we should be doing is searching for the patent. Anyone know who the owner of the patents is?

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...FIELD2=&d=PG01

I haven't read them yet, but above are all of his patent applications.

It appears this one is for the "deck matrix"

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...;+Gene+George"

Thanks for the links. Seems to be like you've been saying for a while. They just use an algorithm on the shuffled deck to create other decks.


That would explain why they don't want to discuss it. If someone could crack their algorithm then they might be able to determine the cards to be dealt. That does not seem safe. They're basically using the deck as a seed to a random number generator. They better be using a good algorithm.

From Patent Application 20090227360

At optional step 114, computer-executable instructions may further rearrange the sequence of the cards dealt in step 106. For example, in one embodiment, the sequence of the rows may be reversed, such as the card in slot 52 will then be at the "top" of the virtual deck and the card in slot 1 may then be considered the "bottom" card of the deck. As one skilled in the art will readily appreciate, each of the 52 cards of a standard deck may be repositioned to each of the 52 rows, thereby creating 2,704 possible arrangements.

We have a Bingo.

Also of note:


Now that doesn't appear to be English, but one interpretation is they're saying they will wait a predetermined amount of time before reusing a deck. Maybe it's a predetermined time between using child decks of the same parent deck? That's a really vague claim.

We have direct evidence of cluelessness.

I didnt read, at all lol, but I assume you suck at poker.

Have fun!

I realize this post is a bit old, but the bolded is the key part. You won't get to "see how the whole thing works" because the whole thing is being treated as a trade secret.

Note that it's not being treated in a manner consistent with being patented - patented processes don't need to be shrouded in secrecy, and can be described in detail. That's the point of a patent - you receive exclusive use of a process or machine for a limited time in exchange for telling everybody how you do it.

I've read the descriptions of their "technology" that they provide. I understood everything that I read. They have not provided sufficient information to assess their system. And, as opposed to the large existing sites, they will not generate enough traffic to do the kind of statistically significant studies on output that have been done on the major sites.

Skepticism of novel claims is an important life skill. It is particularly important for those of us who work in IT Security and Cryptography. People making novel claims that are actually the real deal will be able to defend their claims against skepticism and criticism with logic and fact.

This is not what he claims the system does, and, in fact, it would appear that it would be physically impossible to achieve this at any volume with the machines that he has. As a result, the system has to be doing something else to support the volume. Given that the creator of this system has refused to provide sufficient detail as to what the system is actually doing, people are filling in the gaps with reasonable speculation.

Here's the complete document:


http://download215.mediafire.com/lt0...90227360_1.pdf

and the other, most recent one for the game itself:

http://download65.mediafire.com/ez19...90017917_1.pdf

So I've read the detailed description in the patent application. Apparently Step 114 (Fig 1a) is where they create the "deck matrix" (I didn't see this term used in the patent). This is item [0043] of the document and is also shown in the flowchart of Figure 1a.

All they really say is that they will rearrange each deck to get up to 2704 different virtual arrangements, using fixed algorithms to do so but not an RNG (they specifically say that). And as examples of a fixed algorithm, they say that they could reverse the cards, or they could put all the odd number cards first and the even number cards last. And so on. And each fixed algorithm will be reversible so they can validate that the original deck was used.

How they come up with 2704 arrangements is confusing. Obviously that is 52^2 but it doesn't represent the possible number of arrangements. That would be 52! Or if they intend to just move two cards, that would be 52*51 possibilities. Or if they are just describing a cut, which only changes the starting point, then you have 52 possible arrangements. This 2704 number doesn't make any sense to me. All I can guess is that they put all possible cuts in a grid (52 lines) and then after the player cuts that represents a cut of the cut (52 columns) giving them 2704 decks in a matrix. Basically they cut once then the player cuts once. And they use all the possibilities from that shuffle. I'm guessing, but nothing else makes sense.

Anyway, these fixed algorithms for creating deck variants absolutely create a non-random distribution of shuffles. And worse than that, they will be discoverable and exploitable.

Maybe I'm not reading it right.