That my hand for real takes dumps at the park?

:

Just hopping on the multi-quote with Bobo to make sure things get answered

Hey, that's for when a poster responds to other people and ignores your simple question, over and over again.

Just to recap, he was shown the odds that proved his claim of 20 quads in 7 K hands was completely normal, to which his final response was that you wouldn't see it happen live. No way he should skate by with that idiocy without responding IMO.

I still like the "deal yourself 7,000 hands" idea. This is probably, sadly, the only way he would believe any of this.

Which is interesting because I bet he would agree the odds of getting AA dealt Preflop is 221:1 against. The odds shown in the thread about quads are exactly the same scenario. The odds are the odds, regardless if you've seen it in your live home game or on the interwebz.

Jungmit you know there is only 52 cards in a fair deck and 13 cards of every suit. 4 cards of every rank from 2-A. This makes the odds for any possible combination of said fair deck of cards known and solved.

Just so you know we aren't making this stuff up. And just cuz you haven't seen it in your live game which you've prob played 30k hands over all those years doesn't mean ****.

I know you will read this and the little monkey with symbols in between your ears will continue to clang them together...

I know, I just wanted to make sure Mike sees it

A+

Yes, I saw it. It made me laugh. Every time I saw it.

I have played over 200k hands live Including my home game.

It behoves you to give some evidence of this wild claim, before Monty gives you his old "Liar! Liar!" spiel.

Please ask one of your co-players to drop in to back you up. I'd like to ask him a couple of questions, anyway.

He actually believes the stuff when he says it, he just has no idea that he lies pretty much all the time. For instance he would have no idea how many hours were needed for the amount of live hands he claims to have played, despite that being a relatively simple calculation. He probably played half or fewer of the hands he claims live lifetime, so it will be similar to the 20 quads hands being 9 or less thing - perhaps that is a good way to estimate reality vs his claims for now, do the half rule.

Anyway

Keeping it simple and stupid (and repetitive) with people like him tends to be more effective. However, others continue to try to explain thing logically or use quirky little approaches like

that tend to completely miss the mark when dealing with the doddering crowd. That just enables further doddering, which is what he will do without being appropriately zinged by the quirk. Still, part of the fun of this thread is to see the different approaches, and in the end to each their own.

All the best.

Assuming he is 65+ years old and a keen, lifetime player, 200k hands is a reasonable guess. If he's nearer 80 than 65, which seems more likely to me, then he could well be not too far out. (I accept that that would be by accident.)

Weekly game 50 weeks a year for 14 years. See about 150 hands per night. 20-30 trips per year to casino and play 300-400 hands per day. And I have definitely hit quads and seen quads.

If you hit quads then it was rigged. Guess live poker is rigged. You should be concerned. Happy 80th!

All the best.

Monteroy. Safe to assume you will be in this thread until your 80th! And I assume you're already over half way there.

The specific probability of seeing quads was given above. This was essentially in the context of a 7-card stud hand. It was 224,848 / 133,784,560 which is exactly 1 in every 595 hands (expressed as odds this was written as 594-to-1). In terms of probability it is 0.001680672.

Of course, in hold-em players share community cards. Thus, it may be unclear whether this stud-based calculation can be easily extended to the hold-em environment. A first approximation could be that the probability of observing quads in a 10-player hold-em game would be 10 times the probability in the 1-player game (stud) given above.

Since it is easy to do on my poker simulator, I ran 10,000,000 10-player hold-em deals. In those 10,000,000 deals there were 146,148 deals on which a player had quads. This, of course, is a probability of 0.0146148 (approximately once in every 68 deals).

The reason that the probability of the 10-player case is significantly less than 10 times the probability of the 1-player case (stud) has been stated previously in the thread. In hold-em, everybody shares five community cards. If the board is not paired, there is no way for anybody to make quads. Doesn't matter if there is 1 player or 10 players or 20 players at the table -- nobody is making quads from an unpaired board. So the chance that these 10 or 20 players making quads on a hold-em deal is not independent which is essentially the assumption underlying simply multiplying the 1-player probability times 10 to derive an approximation of the 10-player probability.

Multiplying the 10-player probability from my simulations (0.0146148) times 7,000 deals suggests we should see on average 102 of these deals someone making quads. I should point out that the simulation assumed that all players went to showdown. Of course, in actual poker not all players go to showdown each hand so the observed frequencies are typically smaller than the "true" probabilities (and, in addition, the winning hand is occasionally not even shown).

In addition, statisticians have developed formulas for the range of successes we should observe based upon sample sizes and the probability of success of the underlying event. So using the above probability for the 10-player hold-em case, we can calculate that we should expect to observe between 92 and 112 deals with quads out of 7,000 total 10-player hold-em deals (this is the 95% confidence interval).

Hi jungmit,

Is there a reason one of the only guys who gives you serious answers can't get an answer from you to a fairly simple question?

If you've realized the post I was questioning was actually a bunch of nonsense on your part, there's no shame in admitting it. Ignoring the question looks far worse.

Well, you have been doing the stalker stalkie thing for a while now (in multiple threads) with this latest posting account of yours and likely others before it, so seems you are in for the long haul as well as a throwaway sidekick!

All the best.

whosnext just droppin' bombs on ya moms in this thread, can I get a witness?

Not sure what u are saying.
U guys are mocking people saying if u hit quads live it's rigged. Obviously I have hit quads. I am saying on Americas card room I have hit quads 5 times in hold em over 79k hands. On ignition poker I have hit quads about 25 times in 28k hands. Live in 14 years I have hit quads less the. 25 times. I have 4 str8 flushes live. I hit 3 royal flushes in 4 days on bovada which uses the same software as ignition

I have a question but don't want to get flamed as a riggie. I am 100% not a riggie. I don't think the RNG is manipulated in any way. My concern is about house players and/or superusers which is a very different thing. I currently play on Merge (Micros and MTT's up to $22) any my question is what would constitute evidence in regards to house players/super users.

I see many hands play out where the opponent plays in such a way that the most logical answer (note that I said most logical, not the only answer) is that he knows the final board and your cards before the first round of dealing is completed.

So what would constitute proof? is showing 10 examples of guys getting their chips in with no fold equity (simply calling) and then hitting a straight or two pair vs. a premium starting hand when there is no reason for the player to get involved in the pot at all proof? Before I start putting this together I'd like to know if this is 100% standard, especially at the micros or if it points to something more nefarious. I don't want to waste anyone's time but this has been a real trend over the past 30-40 days. i'm pulling hand histories from PT4 right now but any thoughts on how to check this would be appreciated. I'd like the information I pull to be relevant to what I want to check on.

what I feel like is happening is that players are making out of the box plays in strange situations and then making a big hand. If I had go say something was going on, then it would be that there are users who know the entirety of the deal for a specific hand.

I realize that seems crazy considering the number of hands dealt but Carbon is a very small network and while I want to just write it off to variance, I've been playing a long time and when you get to the river over and over where there is one combo that beats you, and its a weird combo (96o or something similar), and sure enough that is what they turn up with. Yesterday and today were two very difficult days (lost 14 buyins but my EV shows I should have been a winner overall) and then the guy that wins the hand says something like "oops. My mistake. Meant to fold, not move all in." or "I just wanted to play this last hand so I could go out to dinner with my wife." but then plays another 3 hours after the hand in question, one starts to feel like something is off.

Nothing to do with RNG, and probably just a terrible run of variance but I didn't tilt or lose my ability to think clearly after the beats and after the 4th 2 outer in an hour when the money goes in on the turn, you can't help but feel a bit paranoid.

to find the hands i'm looking for, i need to apply a filter in PT4 that shows all hands where someone was all-in on the turn or river. I can't see how to apply that filter. If anyone knows off the top of their head, let me know. If not, I will go into the software thread.

Thanks in advance.

I don't know if superusers have the ability to predict cards or to swap cards in order to give them the winning hand.

From what I know superusers see all the holecards at the table and I know there is a thread on 2+2 on how the UB superuser was caught about 10 years ago by analyzing hand histories, maybe some other posters can point you to that thread.

Hey Jungmit even if you have played 200k hands over all those years you think you'd remember there being quads so many times over a large enough sample of hands? Think about it.

So you say on Ignition you have hit quads 25 times (which is prob an exaggeration of course but we'll use your number ) in 28k hands?

So we'll use you 200k hand sample (which really is nothing) but let's act like 200k hands is something.

200,000/14 = 14,286 hands

So that's how many hands you played per year on average. So it would take you 2 full years of playing tons of poker to get your 28k hand sample.

In general playing that much poker I'd say it's pretty easy to hit 25 quads in that 24 months and all that much time playing live poker. Even only playing 20-25% of hands on average.

Easy question...

What's more likely...

poker is rigged on every site and so are the odds of the game and quads is some magical hand that is only supposed to happen every 100,000 hands because that's how you feel based on your live experience

ooooorrrrr....

You can't wrap your mind around variance and you underestimate the consequences of seeing 5-10x as many hands per hour in online poker?

I've played more than half your lifetime worth of hands on ignition this year already and I barely play. Seen some crazy/hilarious **** but nothing out of the realm of possibility. And all the data I have in my Holdem manager database for the last million hands on Ignition/Bovada would agree.

U make some valid points.

Here's a thought - how about just reading my question and answering it, rather than lumping me in with "U guys are mocking people..." - that has nothing to do with what I was asking.

The question for you was very, very simple. I provided you with a link to the odds for quads, which showed that 20 quads in a 7 k sample was not only not out of the ordinary, but it was pretty much bang on what should be expected. Then you made a remark saying that you wouldn't see 20 quads in 7 K live hands, which made no sense whatsoever. I then asked you whether you thought that live poker was rigged, or if the odds in the link I sent you were wrong. Because if you wouldn't, on average, see quads at anything close to that number, then one of those things must be true. Of course the truth is that one would see them somewhere near that often live if one was able to track live results accurately.

As for the rest of your post, it's ridiculous. Beyond ridiculous. You have no idea how many quads you've hit in 79 K hands on ACR, or in 28 K hands on Ignition, and definitely not over 15 years of live play. That last one's so absurd, I don't even have words. You've proven multiple times that your memory s unreliable (as is everyone's) and that your instinct for probability is dicey at best, yet you continue to make assumptions based on both, which is how you continually reach silly conclusions.