These are all the hands I've seen win at showdown over the last month or so organized into a chart. Only showdown hands turned over on the river by me and other players. It's the hand and how many times it's won in the last 6725 showdowns. I didn't keep track of suited/offsuit hands. They're all rolled into one. Add a couple of points to suited hands, you'll probably be not that far off.

You'll see that there are certain hands that don't win showdowns. If you play those **** hands, don't let them get to the river, you'll do nothing but lose. The hands that play 10X better than theoretical, don't ever be shy with them.



I'm not sure if Pokerstars uses the same crooked RNG across all games. It may not be the same for cash, the bingo games like spin$go, and heads up it might not be the same either. Use this chart just for MTT's. That's where I got the data from.

+2

you should buy some of those nuero boost pills that make you smarter

Pretty sure I found OP's original account :https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/5...table-1613397/

Colin do you live here?
I mean i live on the internet but man, 8.8k posts

Nope I live at your mother's house.

Thanks mate, have been using this my last 50 hands and it's working well.

Actually, all poker sites use the same crooked RNG. This is because they're all run by the same evil entity known as ZOG. Thanks to OP's diligent work the code has been cracked and we can all dominate online poker. Good job OP your a real hero.

Thanks OP, you should tell the news about your discovery.
You'll 100% score an interview.

If all you do is not play the starting hands in yellow and orange, ever, for any reason, muck them to any bet, you're going to better off.

Don't play with hands history says you can't win with.

I was discussing it with YOUR mother. We're thinking of letting you come back home. Youre gonna have to sleep in the garage but hey, its better than that guys moms house.

Hey Ex Mat I was thinking about something

I was discussing it with YOUR mother. We're thinking of letting you come back home. Youre gonna have to sleep in the garage but hey, its better than that guys moms house.

People are already not playing the starting hands in yellow and orange. They’re bad hands.

If your point is that bad hands that people rarely play don’t end up winning a lot, and vice versa, that seems pretty obvious. But that doesn’t seem to be your point. For some reason you think this is Stars-specific.

And your theoreticals about how hands play vs one heads-up random hand aren’t relevant vs a full table of hands that are no longer random by the time you get to showdown.

shouldnt you be fabricating stories in the degen thread?

No, I'm off of xanax, alcohol & cocaine for a bit, so no sharing.
Times are tough. Getting a shrink soon

You forgot to color-code AK and AQ

The numbers are all you need for those two.

People do play them. They play them defending the BB, they play them trying to steal the BB. I'll tell you why I say it's Pokerstars specific and why you never play them. Even before I began compiling this chart I noticed that certain hands never make straights, they never make flushes when suited, they never make trips. Every hand eventually does those things no matter how weak. Since I started work on this chart I've been watching the performance of these hands. I see them sitting in front of me, I muck them and then watch to see if maybe I should have played the hand. Those hands never do anything. They make second and third pair all the time, and go down in flames on the turn and river. They never improve over what you see on the flop. That can't be explained by pure probabilities. Probabilities say 72 beats pocket aces 20% of the time. Eventually you turn and river two 7's, or a 7 and a 2. 1 in 5 times. None of those hands ever do that. They only beat each other.

I sit there with my chart and watch them do it every day. Keep the chart with you and watch what happens. You'll see what I mean. And among those middling hands, many go in streaks. You'll see them win 4 or 5 times in an afternoon, then not win a showdown for a week. So some of those are deceiving. They're good when you catch them on a good day. The mid connectors tend to do that. Even the good hands are subject to hot and cold streaks to an extent, though less extreme and running over shorter periods of time. You only see it when you're keeping track like I do.

One thing I'm surprised nobody noticed is the quantum leap that occurs between any face card with a 9 and any face card with a 10. Going the other way it's a mostly smooth progression with a few aberrations in the middle. I've always said there are more cards 10 and higher on PokerStars flops and boards than what there should be. AT is of course more powerful than A9, but it's not twice as powerful. It's only twice as powerful when there's 2X too many cards 10 and higher on the boards. And that's about roughly what I would have guessed it was.

That's something I'll have to start keeping track of one day.

But people always play AK. What percentage of 94 do you think get played? 5%? It’s a bad hand that people (almost) never play. Even on your steal attempts it needs to get called by better hands, both hands need to make it to the river, and then the 94 needs to win at showdown to make it to your chart. Go watch some live tournaments and see how often J2 wins a showdown.

Similarly lots of players will play AT and not A9 because it can make a straight, and is a better hand. It’s not twice as good, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s played 50% more.

One thing I should have mentioned. When I muck J2 and I see it would have won at showdown. I give J2 the win. So those numbers are actually inflated for the weak hands. In terms of real actual wins, the low and middling hands are all worse than shown. Of course I'm only one seat out of nine. But that translates into 11% inflation. I'd say it's actually closer to 20%. Because as you say, they don't get played often. I am making up for the fact that the hands don't get played as often, at least in part. As much as I can. I wish I could see all the mucked hole cards.

I understand what you're saying, but like I said, you have to watch them to see just how badly they perform. You put K4 up against QJ. K4 should win 55% of the time. I'm not seeing that. I muck my K4, it goes down in flames almost every time. I don't see it winning 55%. I bet it doesn't win 5% and the numbers show that. Like I said, you have to be watching the chart and paying attention to the results to truly understand how badly the hand values are skewed.

If I had to guess, the decks are middle stacked with high cards. With another small area of high weighting at the first 3 cards. With maybe a second high weighting at cards 10. 11 and 12. The first 3 good cards get dealt to SB, BB, UTG. That's the early weight. The middle weight covers the burn and board cards.

It produces this result:

SB 437
BB 681
UTG 329
4 289
5 276
6 289
HJ 340
CO 358
BU 375

That's showdown winners by seat that I've collected so far. Yup you read that right BB is the hands showdown king of the table, followed by SB. The exact opposite of what it should be, given that those two hands are playing weaker hands because they are already invested and rarely have position post flop. Yet they're winning more showdowns than the other seats. The BB by double, with UTG outperforming all early and mid position seats.

That's not what should be happening in a square deck.

should change your name to big knocker cuz u knocked this outta the park

Well there you have it, conclusive stuff. There's no other possible explanation for BB winning more hands.