View Full Version : Statistical data proving internet poker is rigged
Brock Landers
11-29-2005, 10:56 PM
How come none of the "online poker is rigged" people have never come up with any evidence? It doesn't seem like it would be that hard. Just set up a Poker Tracker-like program to data mine a hundred million or so hands (maybe not even this much, I'm not a statistician) and prove that there are more paired boards, flushes, quads, etc. I am sick of arguing with losing players that feel that they are so smart that they only lose because (insert site name) is rigged.
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
theben
11-29-2005, 11:12 PM
wow you are so smart. online poker is rigged dude
If you argue with losing players you have a fundamental misunderstanding about where your money comes from and why. I suggest you look into this.
FlFishOn
11-29-2005, 11:21 PM
THere's little doubt that all players face a measure of collusive cheating and I believe that bots will present a serious problem in short order. That gives some weight to the claim that the games are not honest.
jman220
11-29-2005, 11:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If you argue with losing players you have a fundamental misunderstanding about where your money comes from and why. I suggest you look into this.
[/ QUOTE ]
Arguing with losign players to try to convince them they play badly and arguing with losing players to try to convince them that online poker is not rigged are two completely different things. The first one is stupid, and only enlightens the fishes. The second one defends the intergrity of the game, claims of "online poker is rigged" being unchallenged lead to a smaller fish pool for us all. Whenever I play in a B&M casino, and inevitably the conversation turns to online poker being rigged, I patiently explain, "No, its not really rigged, you just play more hands, play is more aggressive online, etc. etc."
Peter Harris
11-29-2005, 11:41 PM
gods for a minute there i thought this was gonna be an "it *is* rigged" rant
wow, are you just following my posts trying to be a moron? Let's do a couple things here. First, read the original post. Next, let's establish some facts.
a) fish thinks online poker is rigged
b) fish is playing online poker
Now, by your rationale, the OPs actions are correct. However, please tell me how this could possibly improve the situation. Best possible outcome is that he continues to play, which offers no benefit over my advice of not arguing (assuming he would continue to play). however, suppose we take your advice and convince him that online poker is not rigged. He then realizes that his own bad play is what causes him to lose money and either
a) continues to play anyway
b) stops playing
Even if he continues to play, you are making a -EV longterm move when you increase the likelihood of a fish choosing to stop play.
Hobbes413
11-29-2005, 11:51 PM
I'm guessing that there's some collusion going on, but really why sweat it if you're successful anyway.
People trade on insider stock market information all the time. Doesn't keep me from investing in my 401k.
jman220
11-29-2005, 11:55 PM
[ QUOTE ]
wow, are you just following my posts trying to be a moron? Let's do a couple things here. First, read the original post. Next, let's establish some facts.
a) fish thinks online poker is rigged
b) fish is playing online poker
Now, by your rationale, the OPs actions are correct. However, please tell me how this could possibly improve the situation. Best possible outcome is that he continues to play, which offers no benefit over my advice of not arguing (assuming he would continue to play). however, suppose we take your advice and convince him that online poker is not rigged. He then realizes that his own bad play is what causes him to lose money and either
a) continues to play anyway
b) stops playing
Even if he continues to play, you are making a -EV longterm move when you increase the likelihood of a fish choosing to stop play.
[/ QUOTE ]
What your scenario fails to take into account is the five other people playing at the table. Or the friends of those people. Or all the people who might happen upon a poker forum where "OMG ONLINE POKER IS RIGGED" is being discussed in an unrefuted manner. The REPUTATION of online poker is very important to its long term viability. Those of us that actually win money online depend on this reputation remaining positive. One day you too may be good enough to win at online poker (based on your posts thus far, I somewhat doubt it, but hey, you never know), and on that day you too will have a vested interest in the games reputation.
Your small stakes posts are adorable. Would you like to see my BR compared to yours? Shoot me a PM and we can meet up on Party. I am a fulltime player and this is my sole source of income.
jman220
11-30-2005, 12:07 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Your small stakes posts are adorable. Would you like to see my BR compared to yours? Shoot me a PM and we can meet up on Party. I am a fulltime player and this is my sole source of income.
[/ QUOTE ]
LOL. By the way, what were you banned on 2+2 for?
Edit: My E-Penis is clearly larger than yours. And I play infinitybillion/2finity billion HU SNG's exclusively, I'll play you anytime anywhere.
I wasn't banned, I created this account to post to OOT.
Brock Landers
11-30-2005, 12:12 AM
Defending the integrity of the game is far more important than educating a few fishes. Before you semi-hijacked this thread, I simply asked why no one has ever done a statistical study into the hand/flop/distribution of cards on online poker sites. Then, we could say once and for all if online poker is rigged. I believe that it isn't, but this would end these arguments.
p.s. are we all over these stupid "my bankroll is larger than your bankroll" arguments yet? Who ever said that the person with the biggest bankroll is the more skilled player anyway? IMO that is a really stupid argument.
jman220
11-30-2005, 12:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Defending the integrity of the game is far more important than educating a few fishes. Before you semi-hijacked this thread, I simply asked why no one has ever done a statistical study into the hand/flop/distribution of cards on online poker sites. Then, we could say once and for all if online poker is rigged. I believe that it isn't, but this would end these arguments.
p.s. are we all over these stupid "my bankroll is larger than your bankroll" arguments yet? Who ever said that the person with the biggest bankroll is the more skilled player anyway? IMO that is a really stupid argument.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, to get back to the topic of the thread, there has been some statistical analysis done, and there are a few threads with relatively large pt databases, where they looked at a lot of factors including card distribution,percentages of winning hands, hands holding up, etc. Invariably, even these are attacked by the die-hard "its rigged crowd" claiming either, 1. The samples are not being checked for the very very subtle way that the hands are being rigged, or 2. The posters are "in on it." I'll try to find some links to these threads for you, but I know within at least the last two months in this forum there was a thread with a link to a bunch of the older threads.
Brock Landers
11-30-2005, 12:18 AM
Thanks, and thanks for the un-hijack help.
[ QUOTE ]
Your small stakes posts are adorable. Would you like to see my BR compared to yours? Shoot me a PM and we can meet up on Party. I am a fulltime player and this is my sole source of income.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow. Looks like we have a real pissing contest here. Please tell me you don't really think BR size = skill.
P.S. My BR is 8 and a half inches.
voltron.
11-30-2005, 01:03 AM
[ QUOTE ]
How come none of the "online poker is rigged" people have never come up with any evidence? It doesn't seem like it would be that hard. Just set up a Poker Tracker-like program to data mine a hundred million or so hands (maybe not even this much, I'm not a statistician) and prove that there are more paired boards, flushes, quads, etc. I am sick of arguing with losing players that feel that they are so smart that they only lose because (insert site name) is rigged.
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE... WHY DID YOU START THIS THREAD WHEN EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS ONLINE POKER ISNT RIGGED
Brock Landers
11-30-2005, 01:05 AM
I don't believe it's rigged. That's the point of my post. Why doesn't someone (on either side of the argument) do some studies on the hand distribution so we can shut up the naysayers.
pokerplayer28
11-30-2005, 01:22 AM
Proving a site is rigged is about as easy as proving its not, sure anyone could see if theyre getting the correct number of sets, if action flops are being dealt, or if the turn and river have the proper distribution. There are more complicated ways of rigging the deal so that it would be undetectable unless you could see all the cards even then it would be difficult to spot.
The good news is its very unlikely any site would do this, if they did there has to be quite a few people who know about it, the risk of a leak is not worth it, but lets say a site has been rigging the deal. There is no chance of leaks and no chance of anyone detecting it, whats the harm? if theyre rigging the deal theyre probably doing it to favor the weak players, so they last a little longer. This may be a good thing. Look at limit vs No Limit, Limit favors the weak players compared to NL which means the bad players last longer and are more likely to re-deposit thus the quality of players are worse at limit than NL.
As to how to shut up the conspiracy theorists who claim the deal is rigged and ruin the integrity of our great game? Ignore? ridicule? what else can you do
voltron.
11-30-2005, 01:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Why doesn't someone (on either side of the argument) do some studies on the hand distribution so we can shut up the naysayers.
[/ QUOTE ]
BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE... WHY DID YOU START THIS THREAD WHEN EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS ONLINE POKER ISNT RIGGED
gabyyyyy
11-30-2005, 01:23 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How come none of the "online poker is rigged" people have never come up with any evidence? It doesn't seem like it would be that hard. Just set up a Poker Tracker-like program to data mine a hundred million or so hands (maybe not even this much, I'm not a statistician) and prove that there are more paired boards, flushes, quads, etc. I am sick of arguing with losing players that feel that they are so smart that they only lose because (insert site name) is rigged.
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE... WHY DID YOU START THIS THREAD WHEN EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS ONLINE POKER ISNT RIGGED
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's partially rigged..
Why don't I post a multitude of statistics you ask? Well because I would be immediately attacked. "You play more hands online", "you are not looking at the right things",
"short term variance", "why would a site risk it all?", types of responses would be recieved.
On that note I would like to make a few comments on the sites have too much to lose. FIRST, how the heck could they be convicted if every person and their mother comes to their defense immediately?
Sites are essentially not risking anything because they know they have the support of the forum crowd.
Second, by the time anyone figures anything out they will be long gone with their billions of dollars.
Furthermore anytime a computer program decides which cards to deal there is ALWAYS a chance something isnt right.
No one here can say that online poker is fair and random without any doubt. It is just impossible.
jman220
11-30-2005, 01:25 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How come none of the "online poker is rigged" people have never come up with any evidence? It doesn't seem like it would be that hard. Just set up a Poker Tracker-like program to data mine a hundred million or so hands (maybe not even this much, I'm not a statistician) and prove that there are more paired boards, flushes, quads, etc. I am sick of arguing with losing players that feel that they are so smart that they only lose because (insert site name) is rigged.
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE... WHY DID YOU START THIS THREAD WHEN EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS ONLINE POKER ISNT RIGGED
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's partially rigged..
Why don't I post a multitude of statistics you ask? Well because I would be immediately attacked. "You play more hands online", "you are not looking at the right things",
"short term variance", "why would a site risk it all?", types of responses would be recieved.
On that note I would like to make a few comments on the sites have too much to lose. FIRST, how the heck could they be convicted if every person and their mother comes to their defense immediately?
Sites are essentially not risking anything because they know they have the support of the forum crowd.
Second, by the time anyone figures anything out they will be long gone with their billions of dollars.
[/ QUOTE ]
You won't be attacked for posting statistics so much as you are attacked for failing to do so. I really wish I could find that post from a few months ago that linked to all the posts that had statistics of how it wasn't rigged.
pokerplayer28
11-30-2005, 01:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't believe it's rigged. That's the point of my post. Why doesn't someone (on either side of the argument) do some studies on the hand distribution so we can shut up the naysayers.
[/ QUOTE ]
id rather spend my time trying to prove god doesnt exist.
Brock Landers
11-30-2005, 01:49 AM
no, I'm not that good looking
Brock Landers
11-30-2005, 01:53 AM
I'm skinnier also
MyTurn2Raise
11-30-2005, 02:15 AM
My current database
99,830 hands
only 435 AA--I should've had aes about 452 times by now
only 438 KK
RIGGED...I have the proof
memphis57
11-30-2005, 02:51 AM
As mentioned by a few people above, you really cannot prove that it isn't rigged. You are presuming that any rigging would have to be done in a way that distorts the outcomes from what would be expected from the odds of certain events happening. However, all you would have to do to rig it in an undetectable way is to keep track of any deviations from random you make, and then make offsetting moves in hands where it made no difference or where it furthered your ends to have an opposite shift take place.
However, I don't think it happens because the incentives are small and not sufficient to offset the risk of exposure.
As for combating the argument, I think that it may be important for keeping fish around, and that ridicule is most effective. One line (like "Are you wearing a new tin foil hat today?") and then drop it.
ooh tin foil hats.....i would like to submit my pokertracker results that show me being in the green. If that isn't a case for online being rigged I don't know what is.
theblitz
11-30-2005, 08:35 AM
[ QUOTE ]
id rather spend my time trying to prove god doesnt exist.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's already been done.
Just ask Oolon Colluphid. /images/graemlins/smile.gif
excession
11-30-2005, 09:30 AM
Why do we care? Conspiracy theorists would always be able to change the conspiracy a bit to work around the stats you came up with. And even if they were correct it would have to be rigged aganst me and would have to have a serious long-term effect on my win rate to matter in the overall scheme of things.
50% of Americans think the human species didn't come into existence through evolution. They are wrong. So what? Life is too short to spend of all it correcting morons who prefer to believe what they want in the face of all evidence to the contrary..
Rudbaeck
11-30-2005, 11:11 AM
I clearly remember someone on here analyzing a few hundred thousand hands from Party looking for various possible riggings and finding none.
Anyone know what I am talking about and have a link?
pokerrookie
11-30-2005, 12:54 PM
[ QUOTE ]
50% of Americans think the human species didn't come into existence through evolution. I believe they are wrong. So what? Life is too short to spend of all it correcting morons who prefer to believe what they want in the face of all evidence to the contrary..
[/ QUOTE ]
FYP
[ QUOTE ]
How come none of the "online poker is rigged" people have never come up with any evidence? It doesn't seem like it would be that hard. Just set up a Poker Tracker-like program to data mine a hundred million or so hands (maybe not even this much, I'm not a statistician) and prove that there are more paired boards, flushes, quads, etc. I am sick of arguing with losing players that feel that they are so smart that they only lose because (insert site name) is rigged.
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
well I suck at poker but win $$...I vote rigged!
[ QUOTE ]
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
Online poker is rigged and I kick ass at poker. What are you going to do about it?
excession
11-30-2005, 02:58 PM
lol no they ARE wrong but like I said life is too short to explain the obvious to those that choose to believe some crackpot alternative instead...
memphis57
11-30-2005, 09:36 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I clearly remember someone on here analyzing a few hundred thousand hands from Party looking for various possible riggings and finding none.
Anyone know what I am talking about and have a link?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't have a link but I remember the posts - I think there are links in that "favorite threads" post.
As I recall, they proved pretty well with weveral hundred thousand hands that all cards showed up with equal frequency in each of the 5 community spots on the table. But again, there are many ways the game could be rigged and yet still meet that condition.
kieffer
11-30-2005, 10:35 PM
I am a little skeptical about there being some flaws in internet poker. I played on partypoker about a year ago and I was playing a sit and go tourney and when we made it down to two people left, the guy made some comment about me being too tight or something like that, or said that I sometimes bluff too much. I sort of brushed it off, but then he started telling me hands that I had in the past and what I did with them (ones that I didn't show, I have an auto-muck and no one ever called). I then thought he was full of it, but as we were playing heads up, right when I'd get dealt cards, before I would call or raise or fold, I told him to tell me what I have, and everytime he was exactly right.... I don't know if there is software out there that can allow people to do this, but ever since, I stopped playing there. Also, I know of some people who are friends that go sit down at a 6 max table, and instant message each other their hands, and totally screw the other people at the table over. I am not saying the sites fix the poker games at all, but I think playing online can allow for cheating a lot easier than at a B&M casino. Just my thoughts.
Buzz-cp
11-30-2005, 10:55 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Defending the integrity of the game is far more important than educating a few fishes. Before you semi-hijacked this thread, I simply asked why no one has ever done a statistical study into the hand/flop/distribution of cards on online poker sites. Then, we could say once and for all if online poker is rigged. I believe that it isn't, but this would end these arguments.
p.s. are we all over these stupid "my bankroll is larger than your bankroll" arguments yet? Who ever said that the person with the biggest bankroll is the more skilled player anyway? IMO that is a really stupid argument.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, to get back to the topic of the thread, there has been some statistical analysis done, and there are a few threads with relatively large pt databases, where they looked at a lot of factors including card distribution,percentages of winning hands, hands holding up, etc. Invariably, even these are attacked by the die-hard "its rigged crowd" claiming either, 1. The samples are not being checked for the very very subtle way that the hands are being rigged, or 2. The posters are "in on it." I'll try to find some links to these threads for you, but I know within at least the last two months in this forum there was a thread with a link to a bunch of the older threads.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you like sisters or something?
thing85
11-30-2005, 11:33 PM
Even if it were rigged, we're all (probably) winning players, so who the hell cares?
Friedrich888
11-30-2005, 11:40 PM
Because the cards are NOT rigged. The cards are perfectly fair. The players are another matter entirely.
The poker sites are full of cheats that like to go on web forums proclaiming that internet poker is totally clean !
And don't give the tired bogus argument that the sites are getting rid of the cheaters. The sites can only APPEAR as if they are getting rid of the cheaters, the reality is that they can't, which every intelligent person can figure out for themselves.
Friedrich888
11-30-2005, 11:44 PM
"Also, I know of some people who are friends that go sit down at a 6 max table, and instant message each other their hands, and totally screw the other people at the table over."
Thats the whole problem right there. Thats all it takes. The cards don't need to be rigged, and the software doesn't need to be flawed ( although party poker software is sh*t so I wouldn't be surprised ).
Poker Stars has excellent software but they can't stop collusion.
spliff
12-01-2005, 01:38 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I would rather spend my time trying to prove god doesnt exist.
[/ QUOTE ]
In fact that would be much easier.
I think that you can prove that god (in the sence of a force having enlightent prophets into making lyrics for us to live by, Adam and Eve, creating the world in 7 days) does not exist - to the exact same extend that you would be able to prove that Santa Claus does not exist.
You can't 100 % prove that Santa Claus does not exist !
You can't 100 % prove that i am not an alian !
If you isolated a part of the children in the population, adopted them to people who would never tell them the truth about Santa not being real - in a generation or two, you would see a big part of that population worshipping old Santa like kids do in our society. And you would see Precidents hailing the old mighty Santa.
God is Santa for adults - No More No Less!!
I stopped believing when i was 8.
bskillspoker
12-01-2005, 02:28 AM
I am developing a tool to prove or disprove this theory as well as be a useful analytical tool to those who dont care. To seed the stats, I will pay $20 per 1000 hand histories someone can give me. Please email me at jppondo@yahoo.com if you are interested.
BruinEric
12-01-2005, 03:19 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I am a little skeptical about there being some flaws in internet poker. I played on partypoker about a year ago and I was playing a sit and go tourney and when we made it down to two people left, the guy made some comment about me being too tight or something like that, or said that I sometimes bluff too much. I sort of brushed it off, but then he started telling me hands that I had in the past and what I did with them (ones that I didn't show, I have an auto-muck and no one ever called). I then thought he was full of it, but as we were playing heads up, right when I'd get dealt cards, before I would call or raise or fold, I told him to tell me what I have, and everytime he was exactly right....
[/ QUOTE ]
Chat by players is stored in your Party Poker hand histories. I would be interested to see examples of these hands where your opponent identified your pocket cards during play.
MicroBob
12-01-2005, 04:42 AM
to that end....you could have just reported this guy to support and asked what was up with this cheater at your table.
this story does not strike me as believeable.
drj003
12-21-2006, 05:51 PM
Ok, now you people keep saying that it is the losers who say that online poker is rigged. Well I think it's rigged and I am very much a winner at online poker. I a job for a didn't have year and a half and paid all of my bills with online poker(no help from anyone else/no savings/no credit). It was a meager living, but I obviously wasn't losing. I think it's rigged. Totally rigged. I played for 12 hours a day a lot of days. It's not the bad beats that I think are that outrageous(even though I can see people's point on that too). It's when they "turn you on and off" I believe. The first day I put money in a site, I cannot lose. Then when I cashout, it's like I couldn't win to save my life. Then I go to another site and walla, a huge winner. At times I've been crushing the 2/4 at one site, I couldn't crack the 5 cent 10 cent game at a site that has "turned me off". I would also like to note that I am a very winning player in live poker as well. So I'm a very winning player in live poker and online poker, just to make clear, and I think that there is a huge possibility that it's somehow rigged. I just don't want you to think that I'm some fish who blames the "system" for his bad play. Also, I'm not calling the people that don't think it's rigged stupid or anything like that, just saying my opinion....I'm not arguing, just saying what I think, so no wise cracks if you can possibly refrain. This is a discussion. I respect your opinion too. So what do you think about this?-the cashout drought and the deposit prosperity. Are you not experiencing this at all? I hope that online poker is not rigged. I really do. But after playing for hours on end for a year and a half, I feel like it is. Also, I know all about varience. There is enough varience without it being rigged. When I feel like a site has turned me off, I go to another. It works. But I have also tried to ride it out at a site and rarely does that work. Your thoughts about the cashout drougt and deposit prosperity please......
6471849653
12-21-2006, 06:20 PM
Reged: 12/13/04
Posts: 2
You have just lately been learning English? Not my mother tongue either. What you say is pretty much of my experience too, so I don't think anyone is being paranoid or whatever if one is thinking on those lines. Find some sites that are good for you, there are a couple that will be good year after year and then there are some where the fluctuations are not all normal but still some people play and win there year after year, though having more extreme fluctuations. I think there's some welcome money at some sites as I always win there (all skins included) for a start and then later get stuck and has to pay it back. Some sites are not giving any bonuses but they take them back but it's Ok after that, though some sites may take the rakeback back too. But try finding some good sites, they will then give a line of what the game should look like and what one should be winning in the long run; it's then also easier to get out from sites where you don't think things are OK, though if they can be good it's worth putting some time there too but not losing so much that it hurts one's incomes significantly. The same should be used when ever testing new sites.
RoundGuy
12-21-2006, 06:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
so no wise cracks if you can possibly refrain
[/ QUOTE ]
On this subject, that's simply not possible. But, I'll give it a shot.
[ QUOTE ]
I a job for a didn't have year and a half
[/ QUOTE ]
OMG, do you really think anyone will take you seriously with a sentence like that!? You're a winner? I doubt it. Just another loser blaming his losses on "rigged" sites.
Sorry, I guess I couldn't do it.
drj003
12-21-2006, 06:39 PM
Yeah, I didn't proofread and the sentence got tangled up somehow. I'm a winning player though. No need to be an assclown.
RoundGuy
12-21-2006, 06:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I didn't proofread and the sentence got tangled up somehow. I'm a winning player though. No need to be an assclown.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok. If you're a winning player, I'm sure you have hand histories and stats to back up this "rigged" claim, right. I mean, you certainly aren't just basing this on your own intuition or perception, are you? You've no doubt got hard facts. Let's see them.
Please don't expect us to just take your word for it. People like you have come and gone many times before.
Post some evidence, back up your claim, and let some of the very intelligent people here take a look at it.
6471849653
12-21-2006, 06:59 PM
This is of course a wrong forum.
Santa Claus exists because we created him. Mind over matter. What's reality?
What is an "Alian." Some human or humanoid from an another planet? There are none here as we would know it. What is a "human?" We are all more or less different.
God is the same as the Divine that's the same as the smallest stuff the existence is made of. All that stuff follows laws and creates our psychology too; laws, so there's a God.
Bobo Fett
12-21-2006, 07:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Then I go to another site and walla, a huge winner.
[/ QUOTE ]
OK, I usually resist the easy shots, but this one is too funny. Oh, how I lol'd!
Anyway, now that I got that out of my system, let me offer a suggestion. I'm not a believer in sites rigging poker (or god, now that we're at it), but I've heard this deposit/withdrawal theory before. If people really believe it, why not just avoid the problem? Being a bonus chaser, I couldn't possibly have this happen to me - deposit, clear bonus, cashout, move on. Voila, problem solved! I don't do this to avoid "rigging", I do it because that's the nature of bonus whoring. But if you think the sites are all rigged after you cashout, why don't you just finish with the site and THEN cashout? I'm assuming of course that anyone who believes in this theory doesn't have a "home" site, because they could never withdraw if they did.
drj003
12-21-2006, 07:04 PM
Again, I just gave my opinion. I haven't recorded any hand histories to be honest with you. Maybe I shouldn't have posted. This seems to be just a bashing session for the people who think online poker may not be totally legit. My main reason for posting is to see if any of you consistanly have droughts after you cashout and are nearly always on a huge rush as soon as you deposit. I don't think it's totally legit. That's all.
drj003
12-21-2006, 07:10 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then I go to another site and walla, a huge winner.
[/ QUOTE ]
OK, I usually resist the easy shots, but this one is too funny. Oh, how I lol'd!
Anyway, now that I got that out of my system, let me offer a suggestion. I'm not a believer in sites rigging poker (or god, now that we're at it), but I've heard this deposit/withdrawal theory before. If people really believe it, why not just avoid the problem? Being a bonus chaser, I couldn't possibly have this happen to me - deposit, clear bonus, cashout, move on. Voila, problem solved! I don't do this to avoid "rigging", I do it because that's the nature of bonus whoring. But if you think the sites are all rigged after you cashout, why don't you just finish with the site and THEN cashout? I'm assuming of course that anyone who believes in this theory doesn't have a "home" site, because they could never withdraw if they did.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I do, but then I have to go back to the site eventually. There are only so many major sites. I guess my plan became to ride the rush as soon as I deposited, leave with 5 or 6 times what I put in and go to another site in a couple of weeks.
Archon_Wing
12-21-2006, 07:11 PM
I accept the possibility of online poker being rigged. I have no intention of trusting some random unknown company with my money, unless they have earned my trust. And some sites have earned my trust, while others haven't. Unforunately, the evidence concerning the major sites points towards the "not rigged" side imo. Why? Because the people from the "not rigged" camp can often come up with better reasons for why online poker could be rigged better than the "rigged crowd". Furthermore, I haven't seen anyone who claimed onliner poker is rigged ever refute any logical statements. They rely on hearsay, abstract/philosophical nonsense, and lots of dodging. "Oh, but you can't prove it's not rigged!"
It's simply absurd. I have no idea to believe that the people who do win online are all props of the poker site. Are they just really lucky? Could I just accept that some of them are actualy good? I have no idea.
Smilin'
12-21-2006, 07:14 PM
For what it's worth (and I haven't played a ton), my pattern is to lose when I initially deposit, then win later. The people who have that pattern probably just never mention it, so it seems like "so many people" win big after depositing and then get punished after cashout.
Bobo Fett
12-21-2006, 09:01 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then I go to another site and walla, a huge winner.
[/ QUOTE ]
OK, I usually resist the easy shots, but this one is too funny. Oh, how I lol'd!
Anyway, now that I got that out of my system, let me offer a suggestion. I'm not a believer in sites rigging poker (or god, now that we're at it), but I've heard this deposit/withdrawal theory before. If people really believe it, why not just avoid the problem? Being a bonus chaser, I couldn't possibly have this happen to me - deposit, clear bonus, cashout, move on. Voila, problem solved! I don't do this to avoid "rigging", I do it because that's the nature of bonus whoring. But if you think the sites are all rigged after you cashout, why don't you just finish with the site and THEN cashout? I'm assuming of course that anyone who believes in this theory doesn't have a "home" site, because they could never withdraw if they did.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I do, but then I have to go back to the site eventually. There are only so many major sites. I guess my plan became to ride the rush as soon as I deposited, leave with 5 or 6 times what I put in and go to another site in a couple of weeks.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm. So is the rush only good for the first deposit? I always assumed they meant they had a rush every time they deposited, then tanked after they cashed out...I figured a re-deposit would put them back on a rush. Apparently I didn't understand the theory...
Bobo Fett
12-21-2006, 09:05 PM
[ QUOTE ]
For what it's worth (and I haven't played a ton), my pattern is to lose when I initially deposit, then win later. The people who have that pattern probably just never mention it, so it seems like "so many people" win big after depositing and then get punished after cashout.
[/ QUOTE ]
Likely true. I think a lot of these ideas come from incomplete information, which is why everyone wants stats to back up these claims. Much like people who complain how the fish always win with the 2-outers on the river. Of course, they don't see the 25 other times the fish folded on the river because they missed their 2-outer. Or the fish called and the hand is mucked, or even if their hand is seen, it is forgotten much more quickly than the times they make their draw.
HeavilyArmed
12-21-2006, 10:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea to believe that the people who do win online are all props of the poker site. Are they just really lucky?
[/ QUOTE ]
They are, at a minimum, props for themselves.
Not a single soul on this board can state with anything near to certainty that any site is 100% honest. Can't be done.
HeavilyArmed
12-21-2006, 10:15 PM
[ QUOTE ]
For what it's worth (and I haven't played a ton), my pattern is to lose when I initially deposit, then win later. The people who have that pattern probably just never mention it, so it seems like "so many people" win big after depositing and then get punished after cashout.
[/ QUOTE ]
PM me if you'd like to play at a site that juices the new player. I know of two, maybe three.
HeavilyArmed
12-21-2006, 10:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of these ideas come from incomplete information, which is why everyone wants stats to back up these claims.
[/ QUOTE ]
Jump right in and design the experiment you need to run in order to catch a site that is juicing the cards of new players. Once you've correctly done that you'll see why it's not likely to ever be done and why such a cheat is very safe for the site.
And PM me if you want two sites to test first.
5thStreetHog
12-21-2006, 11:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For what it's worth (and I haven't played a ton), my pattern is to lose when I initially deposit, then win later. The people who have that pattern probably just never mention it, so it seems like "so many people" win big after depositing and then get punished after cashout.
[/ QUOTE ]
PM me if you'd like to play at a site that juices the new player. I know of two, maybe three.
[/ QUOTE ]Any more useless and vague statements or accusations you want to make as you troll around dumbing down all the threads???
Archon_Wing
12-21-2006, 11:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea to believe that the people who do win online are all props of the poker site. Are they just really lucky?
[/ QUOTE ]
They are, at a minimum, props for themselves.
Not a single soul on this board can state with anything near to certainty that any site is 100% honest. Can't be done.
[/ QUOTE ]
So like, how many things can you 100% prove?
Refer to the rest of my post that you quoted.
JOHNY CA$H
12-22-2006, 12:50 AM
They don't provide evidence because they necessarily have a lesser understanding of the long term nature of poker and of how to collect and inspect data than the winning the player. As they progress, and learn how to analyze data, they learn about the effect of variance on their results.
JOHNY CA$H
12-22-2006, 01:00 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea to believe that the people who do win online are all props of the poker site. Are they just really lucky?
[/ QUOTE ]
They are, at a minimum, props for themselves.
Not a single soul on this board can state with anything near to certainty that any site is 100% honest. Can't be done.
[/ QUOTE ]
What about the guys with 1 million hand PT databases? That seems to me to be approaching near certainty.
MyTurn2Raise
12-22-2006, 02:49 AM
I suggest everyone go through and look at their all-in situations. Calculate the EV of the best hand going in and compare it to the actual wins/losses after the fact.
Try to say the sites aren't rigged then. You'll be convinced they are.
Buzz-cp
12-22-2006, 04:49 AM
why the [censored] did this thread get bumped?
AbreuTime
12-22-2006, 11:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I suggest everyone go through and look at their all-in situations. Calculate the EV of the best hand going in and compare it to the actual wins/losses after the fact.
Try to say the sites aren't rigged then. You'll be convinced they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
1) It would be quite unlikely to have the EV equal the amount won, except over the very long term. (Imagine doing 100 coinflips. Actually, I recommend trying it. See how many come up heads, and the longest string of heads in a row. You may be surprised that if you do 100 flips, you are quite likely to get strings of >6 in a row, and quite unlikely to win exactly 50 flips.)
2) If you are doing this study over youor poker database, then you likely have been unlucky in the recent time period, and you are probably winning less than your EV in this time period. Players that have been recently winning these flips do not bother to look back and examine these stats.
3) The comparison of winning % and EV, no matter what the finding (greater than, less than, or equal to) is not "evidence" of riggedness. Do you see why? What does it prove exactly?
4) People that think it is rigged can never agree how it is rigged, thus it is difficult for people to prove otherwise. Some claim sites juice the flops, others claim sites love when you deposit/hate when you withdrawel, others claim that the site is simply rigged against them. It's hard to take any of these claims seriously, since there are clear incentives for a site to provide a clean, fair game.
As a last thought, just ignore this post. The sites are probably rigged in favor of people who deposit, so just keep depositing and you should never lose! Then they'll rig the games for you!
HeavilyArmed
12-22-2006, 12:52 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea to believe that the people who do win online are all props of the poker site. Are they just really lucky?
[/ QUOTE ]
They are, at a minimum, props for themselves.
Not a single soul on this board can state with anything near to certainty that any site is 100% honest. Can't be done.
[/ QUOTE ]
What about the guys with 1 million hand PT databases? That seems to me to be approaching near certainty.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are enjoying the comfort of your statistical ignorance.
Site cheating can not be tested for with a PT database except for the most obvious and brain dead ways.
HeavilyArmed
12-22-2006, 01:08 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I suggest everyone go through and look at their all-in situations. Calculate the EV of the best hand going in and compare it to the actual wins/losses after the fact.
Try to say the sites aren't rigged then. You'll be convinced they are.
[/ QUOTE ]
1) It would be quite unlikely to have the EV equal the amount won, except over the very long term. (Imagine doing 100 coinflips. Actually, I recommend trying it. See how many come up heads, and the longest string of heads in a row. You may be surprised that if you do 100 flips, you are quite likely to get strings of >6 in a row, and quite unlikely to win exactly 50 flips.)
2) If you are doing this study over youor poker database, then you likely have been unlucky in the recent time period, and you are probably winning less than your EV in this time period. Players that have been recently winning these flips do not bother to look back and examine these stats.
3) The comparison of winning % and EV, no matter what the finding (greater than, less than, or equal to) is not "evidence" of riggedness. Do you see why? What does it prove exactly?
4) People that think it is rigged can never agree how it is rigged, thus it is difficult for people to prove otherwise. Some claim sites juice the flops, others claim sites love when you deposit/hate when you withdrawel, others claim that the site is simply rigged against them. It's hard to take any of these claims seriously, since there are clear incentives for a site to provide a clean, fair game.
As a last thought, just ignore this post. The sites are probably rigged in favor of people who deposit, so just keep depositing and you should never lose! Then they'll rig the games for you!
[/ QUOTE ]
If you collect data going forward then you eliminate selection bias. I have done this. It has been normal and at other sites it has been shocking.
If you graph EV vs realized and they are criss-crossing lines over time then you likely have a clean site. If you find the lines diverge, never crossing, you hav reason to investigate further. Or in my case, you just stop playing there.
There is no way I know of to compute SDs from such a data set. I simulated it to get some ideas. I had one sample set that was maybe 4 SDs away from expectation. That's a site I don't play anymore.
magoo
12-23-2006, 08:02 AM
[ QUOTE ]
How come none of the "online poker is rigged" people have never come up with any evidence? It doesn't seem like it would be that hard. Just set up a Poker Tracker-like program to data mine a hundred million or so hands (maybe not even this much, I'm not a statistician) and prove that there are more paired boards, flushes, quads, etc. I am sick of arguing with losing players that feel that they are so smart that they only lose because (insert site name) is rigged.
To all these people: Provide the evidence or shut up and admit you suck at poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
Figure it out, for yourself.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.