I kind of like to stay away from PTR because I thought it was frowned upon by the sites. Also thought that you needed to pay to look up players now. I could be wrong and may try tomorrow.

The sample sizes on opponents is small admittedly, but it's all I got right now. Unfortunately, by the time I ended up with sizeable samples on other players, I'll be broke if it keeps panning out this way.

Not that the 12 players with 850-3K hands is sizeable either, it's 1-6 sessions for me, but it does seem remarkable that only 1 is winning.

What I'm really hoping, is that other players in these games will chime in so we can either get an aggregate look and dismiss it (most likely, I hope) or say that it needs to be looked into. You know, show me something normal.

PS - Just checked.....48 of the 85 in the 45+ VP$IP range are winners.

They don't like people talking about it or buying hands, but PTR's been involved in uncovering quite a few cheaters recently, so it's a good tool for things like that. You get 10 free searches a day, and the searches let you see how many hands PTR's tracked and what the person's winrate is.

Not what you'd call conclusive evidence, but you've certainly dug up some worrying trends.

Your all-in percentages do indeed seem a bit low, (and vice-versa, high for the 5-9% stat.) Do you have stats for 0.01-5% and 95-99.9% ?

The fact that poor players seem to be thriving in general is also something worrying and something I've worried about myself in the past.

The site's generic response was a bit feeble as well, shows a bit of a lack of care and respect for their customers.

I'd encourage you to look into things further, if you have the time and resources.


It's a difficult situation. For anyone to take seriously claims of wrongdoing by a site, they expect you to gather masses of evidence which is a time-consuming thing to do. Also, as I think you yourself said, you could indeed run out of money, before you get the chance to gather enough evidence.

As well as that, we can't generally see what other people are being dealt, so we really have no great picture of what is truly going on at the table. Someone who is running FAR BETTER than they should, is unlikely to be on an internet forum shouting about it and demanding answers. So there could be lots of these people out there who are getting far better dealing than they should and either don't realise or understandably don't want to come forward and provide evidence.


Keep us updated.

I thought you said that you were not thriving.

lol at the idea of poor players thriving... I don't think I've ever seen a guy I have at 40 vpip or higher over any kind of reasonable sample size show up as profitable

What does the 'vpip' mean ??

When are you going to learn to use google instead of continually doing this 'I'm so f**king stupid and useless I need to have everything explained for me' routine.

It's pathetic.

Honestly, I don't see how any poker player these days can not know what VPIP is and have a chance at competing on a level playing field with other online poker players. There's a lot of reading to do.

The actual equity averages might be on the lower ends too. Your ranges are too big, just use the actual average for each set. Then calculate a confidence interval around that average to see if the result is actually "strange" at all, or well within a couple of standard deviations.

For example you have 101 AI from 30-39%. If the actual average were 35% or 35 hands, then 2 standard deviations is +/- 10 hands. That means 95% of the time, the result will be between 25 and 45 hands, or between 25% and 45% wins. So anything in that range is totally normal, and anything between 30-39% isn't strange or noteworthy at all.

When you're playing against a large number of players who don't know what 'fold' is, not knowing what 'VPIP' is certainly shouldn't stop you from being able to compete with them.

I like your approach to this, really refreshing

Now about the 48/85 fish - if you and the other regs in the hands you played are running bad, it is only a natural consequence that the fishes in those hands will run good. Beause you guys play against them, you lose to them when running bad.

Because this is affecting your mental state, which no one can blame you for, you can just buy a few million hands for the games you play in and run the tests on them just to clear your mind. You'd pay less than 1 buy in and if you find the results within expectation it will win you more than that I'm sure

Yet you seem unable to do just that, compete with them

And yet you seem to be unable to do so profitably.

This means that you must be a very poor player.

It should also, if you have the slightest intelligence, also suggest to you that maybe you should learn what some of these basic terms mean.

They seem to be thriving over ~100 hands, which is what keeps them playing. If poker was pure skill like chess, they'd just lose constantly and give up. It's their poor play being rewarded occasionally that keeps them playing, live and online. I'd rather they just have a boilerplate reply to "zomg you guys are rigged" emails than spend a bunch of time on them. Luckily for us, evil datamining sites can be used for less evil purposes, such as seeing someone's long term stats without going broke or having to play thousands of hands against them. Seeing everyone's hole cards is irrelevant, as long as you have a big enough sample of your own. Never heard of BBV then, huh?
Voluntarily put $ in the pot. How on earth can you not know that? Someone playing 45% VPIP is putting money in the pot by choice 45% of the ime, so blinds aren't included.

PFR stands for preflop raise, just to head off a potential follow up.

Online poker is so rigged, I have never won a single hand and I have played over 75,000 hands now.

I didn't realise that the sample size the person was talking about was as small as 100 hands. If that's the case, it obviously doesn't show a lot, but it's still strange that so many decent players would be struggling and so many bad players thriving.


I'd disagree that seeing everyone else's hole cards is irrelevant. An exaggerated example, but I could be getting dealt hands randomly and my opponent could be getting dealt pocket aces every 3rd hand and I'd be none the wiser. It's very difficult to know what's really going on because of this hidden information, (opponent(s)' cards.)


I didn't know what 'VPIP' meant, because I'd never come across it before. I play primarily heads up, where I assume it's not such an important statistic ? Would that be right, or is it as important in heads up ?

It says on google it's a statistic used by PokerTracker, which as explained previously I had never used before. Thanks for explaining the meaning though.

Haha, based on what ?

What evidence do you have that that's the case?

...

Thought so.


Only if you are completely clueless about statistical distributions.

And completely lacking in common sense.

If he's getting pocket aces every third hand don't you think that there's just the tiniest chance that they are going to make it showdown slightly more often than a more usual distribution would indicate?

Are you seriously saying that, even now you've had the meaning explained to you, you don't understand its importance?

Just how hopeless a case are you?

You mean you half read one explanation. VPIP is in no way exclusive to PokerTracker. Just more evidence of you utter cluelessness.

Based on your own posts.

1678 pages indicates this will never end. It does generate the most activity on the site though so a good place for ad placement.

So, why doesn't one of the non riggies (who is a winning player) take one of the riggies (who is a losing player and one of the more vocal ones), teach him how to win and have them admit to such here.....

OR

Find a neutral location, have a non riggie (winner) play on a riggie (loser) account to prove that accounts cannot be doom switched.

Has this been attempted?

Seems like a lot work.

No it doesn't.

The thread: "Person to person transfers. [The first post is a "MUST read" for the Posting Rules]" grows much faster.

Actually sounds easier than 1 side proving the other wrong with incomplete data.

Something odd/bizarre/wrong I've noticed today on iPoker. Not sure if it would suggest they've got their actual percentages wrong, but........

When players are all-in and their cards are revealed, the percentage chances of each player winning and the percentage chance of a tie come up on the screen.

When a player has 4 outs on the river, (4/44 remaining cards,) a 9.09% shot, this is given as 10% on screen.

I thought this was strange, but thought maybe they just round up numbers below 50 and round down numbers above 50, rather than rounding to the nearest number. Bit silly, but whatever.

Then, however, I saw a player all-in with 3 outs on the river. That is 3/44 remaining cards, a 6.82% shot. This, for some reason, was given on screen as a 6% shot.

I can't understand this. Firstly, I hope it's just the percentages on screen that aren't in line with each other and not the actual percentage chance that it happens.

Secondly, why on earth and how on earth would you end up with a system which rounds down on some occasions and up on others ? Especially when it's a computer which is doing this, surely the computer would be programmed to, (in normal cases,) round to the nearest number, or either always round up, or always round down.

Have I missed something ?

Could they be accounting for the other player's hole cards? Seems stupid to do so, but they do have that information...