(there's a similar thread for PP zoom games)

400k hands @ PS z100 i've played since last october:


100+ entries only, p4/hm2/hm3 show same stats, how is this possible?

You probably didn't filtered it by the number of players.

thx, smartass



equal positional distribution would double my winrate

z200 2020:

2019:

i had a quick look and mine seems fine.
i didnt check every screen u posted but in the last for example if its 6 handed 1/6 should be 73576~ so u got more bu as well as blinds for some reason

it's "sit out next big blind" related, i sit out w/ 108bb, a friend of mine sits out w/ 140bbs and has similar but less extreme pattern
how is it now evening out?

is it just simple combinatorics or am i tripping?

yeah its ep/mp missing

how does sitting down even work? could it be: 1st hands is bb and 2nd/3rd is weighted towards sb/btn? and then its evenly randomized?

Such a shame to see one of the nicest players on stars, forced to move down stakes.

seems like its weighted (obv lol samplesize)

bb sb co btn ep btn

bb sb btn bb btn sb

bb btn sb co mp btn ep

bb sb co btn mp

bb mp sb ep bb sb

bb btn sb co mp ep

bb sb co btn mp

bb sb btn btn ep

seems like "sit out next big blind" works fine, its the act of sitting down

Yeah, as I've been saying in the other thread, it's not just Party, it is likely many sites that are screwing regs with the Fast Fold Poker format.

I noticed that I was well down on IP seats compared to the blinds at Zoom, mostly losing EP seats but still that is a significant loss of EV nonetheless. Once I realised this I quit immediately and went back to regular tables, because at least there you can 'see' what is going on and monitor the true poker environment that you are participating in.

Regular tables give roughly even numbers across all seats, with slightly less in the blinds compared to the BTN and CO thanks to fish busting and not completing their orbits, which is fine as that is an EV gain at the expense of players electing to quit early, so it is a positive gain that has come about from the actions of your opponents and is all cool because it is not something that regs themselves are trying to gain from, it is just an additional and inherent sweetener to the deal.

However in these fast fold pools at stakes that run 24/7 where you never play shorthanded, it is literally 6 players dealt in every single hand, yeah maybe sometimes you go 4 or 5 hands before posting your BB again, and this is balanced by sometimes going 7 or 8 hands before posting your BB again so that in the long run over decent samples it should all even out, so why we are not seeing big samples with approximately even numbers across all the seats is really disconcerting.

None of it makes any sense, but it does so happen to screw regs over it seems, so I doubt this 'bug' or whatever it is, is just something innocent and 'kosher', no matter what the explanation that people try to come up with.

~247600, so i m getting more CO's, but its not offsetting $ loss from blinds

wait are you telling me you don't click sit out next bb, but just sit out and open a new table when you get "deeper"?

i always wait for bb

but 1st hand on a new table is alwayss bb (obv) and 2nd and 3rd are heavily weighted towards sb and btn (or so it seems) which leads to #bb>#sb>#btn...

Yeah, and there is nothing wrong with playing that way, sitting out at each bb is the best way to play and should leave you at no disadvantage where you get more blinds and less BTN, CO, MP or EP.

lmfao.

could mod change the title to something like "PS zoom - more hands on blinds and btn", thx

hm2 -> sessions by table:
1st 4 positions:
bb sb btn X > bb btn sb X >> bb sb X btn > bb X sb btn > etc

you are basically being penalized for sitting down

All my zoom hands (330k z100, 126K z50, 65k z200). Don't do any rat holing.

The BB and EP look a tad too high for me.

The SB, BTN, CO and MP look close enough that I would be happy with those four positions.

When fish don't complete their orbits in Zoom, shouldn't this lead to fish (as a sub-population) playing more BB's than other positions, therefore meaning that regs should have less BB's than other positions over big samples?

Or do losing accounts join the pool and they don't get auto-sat in the BB for their first hand?

I think the losing accounts are joining the pool and they don't automatically go to the BB first-hand! Judging by the scheme and location described above and personal experience!

Rofl. Atleast you admit being a losing player.