26 if they burn before each street, which I believe is how realdeal does it. That's half the deck. I thought about this too and how it might affect their resequencing algorithms. They could do a straight reverse with no problem I think. Others are more dicey.

It would still prevent a pretty huge problem if people knew which deck was being reversed. They'd potentially be able to eliminate a lot of "dead" cards from the deck. For instance if you are dealt a pocket pair and you knew that the board contained one of those cards in the reverse dealing then you know your chances of getting a set are greatly reduced. Or if the board played out 4 or 5 to a flush and you are dealt suited cards in that suit you'd be able to discount the flush potential.

However, if there's no way to tell which half deck matches up with which other previous half deck then I guess it's not too bad.

I was having dinner in a Pizzeria on the Isle of Man a few weeks ago and spotted 5 guys (with North American accents) having dinner two of whom had real deal poker hat / tshirts on.

Tried to overhear what they were discussing but couldn't.

(Apologies - not a great story, but true nonetheless)

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH
BWHAHAHAHAHAHA
Rock on VP!!!! AND Rock Hard!!

That was worth posting.

We don't get many posts from IoM visitors or residents.

Did you manage to keep a straight face?

Did they have one real bill, and then use that to generate 5 virtual bills?

rofl

Read list bull **** that an admistrator at Real Deal Poker Forums just wrote to me when I was trying to tell him the when the deck gets split by a Deck Matrix that is just another way of RNG..

I'm speaking for myself again here.. (All me) I do not think a programmed computer system (programmed by man) is capable of making any 100% true random event. (A real shuffle from a REAL DECK of cards however, Can! It's doing it right now.. In the test games on Real Deal Poker.)

So..

I say you are WRONG. (Sorry - I debate with you and respect you get your own take on all this)

The matrix is just another re-shuffle as I see it (If I see it right) of the ONLY "real shuffle" ever to come to online poker. (Again, I could be wrong) but ther is no way based on what I know and also with what I've seen in testing.. I think many others here and even players yet to arrive here as well, will agree that this RD system is not anything remotely close to the old warn out RNG.

You are trying your best at trying to make the RNG connect with RD, to fit your feelings but I'm afraid it nothing even close. Not when the original SEEDS are from total true random events. I really believe, only weak minded, non thinkers (non poker players) and or poker players that have only ever played online (And do not know any better) will grasp your "key" information lacking ultra quick take on things..

In other words - Patience. Give it a few months and lets see how it all pans out.

I'm starting to laugh now.. On how many poker players are choosing, for reasons I'd LOVE to know and understand.. (Basically biting their noses off to spite their face) Deciding "NOT to get themselves more choices" when it comes to online poker. I think it only makes the RNG sites look worse.. (And in many of my polled players and from the thousands of posts found with simple google searches - They are not doing all that well in the trust department to begin with)

Keep it up. The fall will be hard for me to watch. It's not your fault - Someone OR some reason, possibly MONEY and GREED(?), got you to swallow the hook and you're stuck is all.

Real Deal and everything we do here is about an online poker site that puts the players first. An audit-able fair and honest poker game that get's everything "cards deal wise" in it's system - from an actual REAL DECK of cards.

LOVE IT!

I love it more and more everyday.

Um, played some play money tonight:

Cutting deck makes absolutely no difference (unless they are using a different algorithm for real money games).

The bad beats (gotta love them, made some chippies) - keep on coming.

Software buggy, if I get up from seat, leaves me in seat sitting out.

Once again, deal looks just like any other online poker room - I do believe Josem has this right.

Will be uninstalling.

Aside from being a bit difficult to read (sounds quite rambling), this is a very standard marketing approach when the targets are paranoid people. Pick a storyline to stay with and never veer from it (in this case RnGs are evil).

I suspect a lot of the people at Real Deal know they are shoveling it when they say this stuff, and they do not care if the person they are telling it to is a genuine target riggie or a "secret agent for the truth" like you were I suppose. This is their marketing hook and they will stick with it as they should at this point.


Speak to a 9/11 nutjob, and no matter what you say they will never veer from their beliefs. All the Real Deal people are doing is copying this approach (since it is very appealing to paranoid riggies). Whether they believe the stuff they are saying is completely unimportant, they are essentially in "be paranoid" infomercial mode 24/7.

You did nothing that will change anyone's views. They want paranoid riggies and some will find their approach appealing. Exposing them (aside from if their deal is actually flawed) will not change a riggie's mind, though a few bad beats eventually will as they "see patterns" in the Real Deal deal.

That's the problem for them. Their hook is cute and creative, but their target market is tiny and will never stay loyal. Guys like you do not matter to them, other than hoping some of you increase their traffic by trying their software to "expose" them, and the more attention you give them, even negative attention, fuels them further.

Just sit back and let the marketplace do what it will do.

Is it possible to calculate, or even estimate, the predictability or exploitability of the system under discussion?

Specifically, if we stipulate that the mechanical shuffling of the cards is random (it may or may not be in reality), but that many predefined configurations (such as the one given in the patent application, same deck dealt in reverse) spawn many virtual decks from the matrix, are the virtual decks themselves equally as random as the physical deck was, or are they at all predictable or exploitable?

Assume that a hypothetical multi-accounting data-miner has access to millions of simultaneous hole cards and boards from all of the open tables.

I conclude that any certifying lab investigating a matrix dealing system must consider factors such as these.

Cliff Notes:
Are predefined configurations from a random sequence also random?

I'm no stats whiz, but I would expect them to be.

I would have thought any possible exploit would come from someone being dealt from a shuffle and then being dealt another configuration of that same shuffle at a different table.

But could the site not see all of the possible matrix outcomes? And then give certain players certain a matrix so they always win? Or tie ? Or get all the money in and hit the 1 outer? Just like all other rigtards claim happens? So even if the deal is random, the deal you get may not be.

That e mail sounds like Giblets ramblings.

Right. It doesn't really matter what they do. I suppose if one deck in the shoe corresponded to one and only one hand on the table, and they had video evidence that the shuffle came from the machine, that would be close. But there'd still be no way to know for certain that it wasn't shuffled hours or days previously, and then they chose which shuffle to use for you.

That's why so many people say you need to measure the output; in the end, that's all that matters.

I'm thinking it could be decided which deal to give you in a matter of nano-seconds, not even days. IF they wanted to rig it.

I am looking forward to them opening up for real money so members here can measure the output. Funny, Real Deal Poker is only good with Fake Money.

Eh, with Fake Money - its the same as any other online site.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUnUTqAtbjw

Gene points out that "75% of French gamblers are rigtards"

Xenophobia.

It's the best way to get your site taken seriously.

An interesting discussion. I play online poker for 1 year and try fix it respected the game. I play just freerools and not investing money in the account. All my games are in HM, we can say to what conclusion I came.

1. PokerStars: Who gets in most cases all, and when it comes to the larger amount of chips? Maniac or call station that plays the game even irrational and pointless, but the river it in 85% of cases falls just right, the only possible winning card. Hop hop, I look at PokerProLabs, PokerTableRatings or SharkScope and still look the same coincidence. Always it is a player who has lost a lot of money, which means that it requires constant cash on account. That it is therefore consolation prize. If you already wasting their money on Cash Games in our house,at least there a cure for their complexes with a bad game and winning.

2. Full Tilt: Never Play All IN against a player from the USA or Canada. Definitely you will be lost unless the game very little chips.

Does not hurt me too, because I do not play for money, but it seems to me a very incorrect and ugly, as they spend the time to bother me overcome the sheep that had that opportunity system, which owns an online house.

Alternatively, that I am indeed one exception, and it is my happiness, sometimes even below the average for a good hand so that I can not compete with the same amateurs like myself.
I would also be a professional, if it ever fell on the table cards that are better than the opponent.

My conclusion is this: money paid into the account and luck will be on your side.
If not, you say good-bye happiness

I have this strange feeling of deja-vu.

As if I've been here before.

.

Your first sentence was good. The use of "An" instead of "A" was correct.

Yes. The use of the correct indefinite article in these situations is always a good start.

Here's my thing...

I haven't played live nearly as much as some, but, basically every time I've played in a casino there's been at least one guy cursing the dealer and blaming the dealer for losing. And yet nobody has opened as casino catering to guys who like to throw cards at dealers. I suppose it is possible given the "long tail" concept you could find a critical mass of riggy players online. And obviously the sharks will be more than happy to follow the fish wherever they go.

However, given that riggy belief and behaviour is present both live and online regardless of venue the perils of wooing those kinds of players should be obvious. For all the online riggies protestations of live poker being less rigged, the obvious reality is that there are just as many live riggies who still blame the dealers in a B&M card room. So if having a physical deck in a real casino is not enough to satisfy the riggies, why would a virtual deck (let alone psueodo-RNG generated matrix decks) in an online site be any different?