They have already said that the answer to this is no, in videos, interviews, and in the patent application. But they try to dance around it to preserve the original concept in people's minds, and what they won't say is how they create the computer-generated variants that actually get dealt.

What does this mean?

http://www.gioiasystems.com/cut-n-shuffle.html

"Each deal from a real deck is used only once."

You have to read between the lines for that. I want the owner to come out and say whether or not you get a deck of cards that came directly out of a shuffle machine or not.

That's kind of like saying everything that is red is red. What the sentence doesn't say is, "Each shuffle from a real deck is used only once."

I noticed the choice of words also.

Congratulations on post 4000.

spadebidder
Pooh-Bah
spadebidder's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This looks interesting.
Posts: 4,000

I posted earlier that I had contacted the IoM gaming comition and they said Real Deal was undergoing certification.

Dear Mr Greatest poker player in the world,

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


** Ya Gongrat's on 4,000 Spade

Heh, didn't even notice until you pointed it out. Thanks.
I need to spend my time more productively than perusing 2+2 every day.

For example:

- describe the shuffling procedure
- describe the deck matrix system
- describe the RNG system
- describe the overall controll system
- describe how the distriuted cards come into the player's computer
- make it clear that the whole system is safe and not exploitable
- make clear that no rake maximization system can be used because everything is true random
- show videos how it works
- invite respected players like Josem and 2+2 Mods to the pokerroom
- make all audits (about card distributions, controll system, internet security) transparent
- make audit reports downloadable as much as possible; as extensiv as possible and always up-to-date
- make sure that the auditor is an everywhere respected independent audit company
- show daily, monthly, yearly stats about all distributed hands on the website (possibly for all limits and different games)
- make all hand histories where the player has played downloadable
- ?
- ?
- etc


My proposal for a somewhat heated discussion (please close your eyes and start to dream!) - I hope I get no ban:

I know that an extensiv player information system is not cheap, but it is in the interest of all players. The rake should therefore be a little bit higher than a normal rake with rakeback. Offer nice deals without affiliate participation as much as possible. Limit affiliate fees as much as possible - no tracking system if possible. Fix affiliate fees to max $100. Discuss a book incentive system with 2+2 officials. Try to avoid cannibalistic affiliates who play off one pokersite against another one. Not the short term success is important, think long-term. Try to reduce the rake medium-term as much as possible - squeeze affiliates out of business as much as possible, try to pay taxes and get legalized in all countries instead.

My most important personal disire (if this could be realized then I would be in heaven):
Try to offer as early as possibe all important games, especially mixed Games like Horse and 8-Game-Mix.
Tip: 2+2 8-Game-Mix championship forums tourneys series will always start shortly after the WSOP. A well known German Poker Pro and McSeafield are already prepared to organize such tourneys. Ray Zee and other well known 2+2 personalities and the whole 2+2 community is always welcome to participate.

From the webcast, to someone's question about deck matrix:

"I came up with this when I figured out we couldn't put 20,000 shuffling machines in a warehouse.....
[With the deck matrix] we can create over 10,000 new decks every 20 seconds. Every 20 seconds they are discarded and a new set created. Those decks are created based on certain random events."

He said that's all he can say for now but that he will be able to explain it all when the patent is approved.

If it quacks like an RNG, it's a duck. Er.. RNG.

I asked a more specific question about the deck matrix and it was ignored and not read or answered. I asked if each physical shuffle is used only once, or if the deck matrix creates more virtual shuffles from one physical shuffle. The answer to that is obvious (no and yes), but I wanted to hear how he answered it. He didn't.

I am a CPA. The idea is imo garbage.

gene already said he cant respond to how the system works yet,
Some thing to do with the patient.
so the real questions is gene when can you tell us how it works?

1st’ly that was my question to him on the webcast, he didn’t answer any others I put to him.

I think a lot of you have missed the point about RDP, if and I say if there process of delivering non RNG’ed hands that works then this is what I think. If you’re playing in a card room/casino and you suffer a “Bad Beat” i.e. a 1 ,2 or 3 outer, or runner,runner then even though it’s hard to take (god I know) you understand that the cards were always going to fall that way.
When you play online and the same thing happens your never 100% sure whether the outcome was, completely fair, based on how RNG’S work. So IMO if I was to play RDP and have “Bad Beats” as long as I was sure, as I am in a card room/casino that the outcome was completely fair then I feel this is a major step forward in poker online. Whether RDP manages to survive or not is irrelevant it’s the fact they were prepared to try to improve poker online. History is full of pioneers and with pioneers sceptics will follow until it’s proved beyond any doubt.

Please explain?

Let's assume it is really garbage. But the big problem still remains how a pokersite could make it transparent and visible that the RNGs are true random?

According to the current situation the pokersite shows only a piece of worthless paper without any guarantee. This is no quality characteristic at all. Any rigged company can do the same or use such a piece of paper for years.

The pokerroom manager knows possibly for sure that everyhing is true random but the player not. He has to produce massive output first to get a guarantee always for the past but never for the future and if he founds a mistake he can proof nothing. The question remains allways shall I trust or not in case of strange behaviour. (Big downswings happen within random quite often but the player is uncertain). Shall he believe in God or not. The problem is - God is not visible. We players get never hard facts and if we gets them then nobody can proof anything.

Exactly this is the problem of the current situation. Why should I produce massive output first if I already know that approx. 95% of all player lose after a huge sample. Was it random, rake, bad play or rigged?. A downswing can be very deep within true random. I know. Crazy situation. Only to overcome imo if the pokersite proofs that any single hand is true random and fair.

According to my view as an experienced gambler (not poker player).
If someone loses money he has to know with 100% security that the game is not rigged. If he knows for sure that everything is fair then is willing to lose more. Also from this perspective is imo Gene's concept brilliant. Real Deal could have many fishes, which are all willing to lose more.

I'm running out the door here so I don't have much time at the moment, but when you label something that demonstrates detailed processes to ensure fairness as "a worthless piece of paper", you pretty much destroy your own credibility. You don't have an open mind and are paranoid. There's nothing I can tell you that will change your mind.

Personally I've had no issue making significant money over the years at a variety of poker sites through studying the game and hard work. During that time I've analyzed card distribution and all in EV over close to a million hands, with no evidence of wrongdoing. Maybe it's just been rigged in my favor all this time from site to site. Maybe being a CPA magically makes me a genius. Who knows. But the RealDeal concept is absolute garbage. It implies there's something wrong with the current games when there is no such evidence. If they want to appeal to the paranoid and there's a market for that, then more power to them. But that's exactly what they're doing and it's the only value in what they're doing.

and also to play higher limits. -> I guess much more fish on higher limits.

Nice. Pretty much confirms what many of us have been saying.

And really, as long as it's done right, there's nothing wrong with that. The only thing I take issue with is the way RDP has presented it. They're claiming no RNG, obviously for marketing purposes. I think they would have been better off saying that yes, they still have to use an RNG (or whatever name they like to call it so it sounds better than RNG), but they've added a layer of randomness (yes, I know it's either random or it isn't) and authenticity by seeding everything with a "real deal". Don't say you're replacing an RNG, say you're enhancing it.

But maybe that's a marketing nightmare. At least don't mention the RNG thing up front then. You're using real decks of cards with a real shuffle, and leave it at that. The people that really care about those details can dig through the website and discover they use an RNG and a matrix. The riggies won't care to check that kind of thing, and those of us who care to know aren't scared of RNGs.

I don't agree. If they are using a RNG then I don't think they should be actively trying to deceive their customers into believing there is no RNG being used. I don't trust a site that is trying to trick me. What else are they wording just right to avoid telling us the whole truth?

I'm also very curious how their system is so audit friendly if they are using a RNG.

Step 1. shuffle deck
Step 2. randomize
Step 3. deal totally different deck
Step 4. profit

I'm thinking step 2 is a big issue. I suppose if their "random events" are all based on the original shuffle then it can be audited to show how the seed was used in an algorithm to produce the deck. If the "random events" are mouse movements from users or anything else that is unpredictable then it comes down to "take our word for it that this is the seed we got at that time to produce this deck". That's easily rigable.

I think there is little hope for the patient.

Something of a still-birth, probably.

in after ban

Thank you 2p2

This was our clue.

About McSeafield
Biography
If blind hate and enviers surround you, ...
Location
banned by 2+2


fyl
ty guys I needed that. Any details? Perma? I looked at his profile but couldn't find any info, I've never looked at anyones ban before.

Can every one agree this site could be good for poker?

I think the majority of people will agree that this site is pretty much irrelevant for poker.

It may get a few of the more paranoid rigtards playing for a while but as soon as they see exactly the same bad beats on RD as at other sites they'll desert it in double quick time.

Nostradamus, imo.