Party Poker RND shuffling
 

I like to know how the good players deal with the RND of Party Poker.

Having played for more than 3 years now on this site and collected over 500k hands. I am able to analyse many , many things.

The thing that I find really interesting is how these stats can be so far off from ´real´ poker stats. The result of a hand is determined by many factors but one thing is for sure, IT IS NOT RANDOM SHUFFLING at the beginning of each hand and the the result of each card on the board is determined by a number of factors.

Just one more thing, I am not asking this because I think Party is rigged. So please no comments in that area.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

ill bite.
what is an RND? what are real poker stats, and how are these different? what are some of the factors that determine a hand?

if what you say is true, this would mean that party poker is rigged.
this is a pretty stupid thread.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

500 000 is enough to prove a random generator to be wrong huh?

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

Before you start flaming, next time try to read what is written.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
500 000 is enough to prove a random generator to be wrong huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Easily, if you are interpreting the results correctly.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Before you start flaming, next time try to read what is written.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read your post several times, and I have the same problems/questions as the other poster. You appear to be saying that the actual results are statistically different from expected probability, but provide no evidence or description of your work. You say that the cards being dealt are determined by a number of factors, but don't give any information of what those factors are, or how you determined this.

In short, you have provided no evidence and no logical argument for your unclear premise. The result is that your post appears to be just another "rigged" post.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Before you start flaming, next time try to read what is written.

[/ QUOTE ]

We did all read it, that's why you're getting flamed.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
500 000 is enough to prove a random generator to be wrong huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Easily, if you are interpreting the results subjectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

how do you interpret them?

Cant a true RND generator give you AA 1000 times in a row? Unlikly, but thats the beauty of randomisation right?

Not sure how you prove it with 500 000.

Maybe 5 million ? whats the deciding factor, or the required samplesize?

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
how do you interpret them?

Cant a true RND generator give you AA 1000 times in a row? Unlikly, but thats the beauty of randomisation right?

Not sure how you prove it with 500 000.

Maybe 5 million ? whats the deciding factor, or the required samplesize?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, you can't "prove" anything with 100% certainty. All you could show was that an event was unlikely enough to happen randomly that the greater likelihood is a faulty RNG.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

Just checking, but is this a party is rigged post?

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just checking, but is this a party is rigged post?

[/ QUOTE ]

More of a Party's random number generator sucks.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

I dont want to comment on all so one post.

As long people are winning, and know what would give them an advantage (if any), they wont discuss any of this or just flame.

Having said that, I am an overall winner but I am also a concerned winner. I rarely have a losing month over the last 3 years. I am not mentioning this to brag just to let you know I am not a sore loser. If you play that many hands, like I do, the things you remember best are the bad beats. That is why we all play with trackers, to analyse our hands. The stats dont lie but the interpretation can be wrong. I can post the stats but then people start flaming them. How bad a player I am, etc.. etc..

I was just hoping that other people also conducted a thorough analysis and looked at other factors that could determine the outcome of a hand.

Just remember that there is no official body controlling these online gambling sites. It is always in these site´s best interest to have action at the table. They can do this by keep the weaker player at the tables as long as possible, determine the cards on the board (i.c.w. the hand) the determine the rake generated, so the more action, the better. By favouring all-in, raises, etc.
I am not saying this happens but it could. Just to mention factors that can be used to analyse your stats.

Now why would I write a post about it when I am winning money at it? Just one reason really, I want to know how random and unbiassed the pokersites are. Maybe I am not as good as I think I am. Maybe I just know how to get a small advantage, without realising it.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

Impulsiveme, you have very few posts. Always a concern on this board and your talking in circles. I think its your intention, to have people wondering what in the world you are stating. If you care to elaborate then do so. Otherwise, why make a post that divulges no information.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just checking, but is this a party is rigged post?

[/ QUOTE ]

More of a Party's random number generator sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the difference?

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

It's been a while since I've had Burger King or any other
fast food. Salads are much better for you and give you
more energy.

-ZEN

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

I don't see the point of making ridulous remarks on this topic. If the initial poster did some statistical analysis to prove that Party "random" shuffles don't produce the expected results, then it is an alarming result and not funny in any way.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
500 000 is enough to prove a random generator to be wrong huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Easily, if you are interpreting the results subjectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???? Not sure if you are attacking my post or just mocking the OP.

If I play 500,000 hands, and I get dealt AA exactly x times, I can tell you exactly how confident I am that the results came from a random shuffle* . If I got dealt AA 0 times, I would be pretty confident that the shuffle wasn't random. If I were dealt it 2262 times, I naturally wouldn't have any particular reason to be suspicious. If I were dealt it 2,000 times, I'd have to run the math, but off the top of my head I'm pretty sure that would be suspicious.

I'm not sure why "objective" needs a FYP into "subjective".



*(to be more accurate, I can compare the hypotheses of a specific nonrandom shuffle to a random one)

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see the point of making ridulous remarks on this topic. If the initial poster did some statistical analysis to prove that Party "random" shuffles don't produce the expected results, then it is an alarming result and not funny in any way.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's funny in every way is posters who report that "random" shuffles don't produce the expected results without doing credible statistical analysis.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:

Quote:
Just checking, but is this a party is rigged post?



More of a Party's random number generator sucks.



What's the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]


I think one is an intentional thing, another is a laziness thing.

The Bellagio poker room is rigged!

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

Well, one thing that is remarkable on Party Poker is the fact that people going all-in (limit) seem to hit miracle outers a lot.

But I don't believe Party is rigged. It's must be coincidence.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

The problem is that there is nothing to say Party's RNG is better or worse then a typicle B&M joint.

I have been reading this stuff on 2+2 for many many years when there were only a few online sites running. Before 2+2 went to THIS format.

Nobody has ever proved to me that a online RNG is better or worse then a live game.

SO - perhaps someone should look into LIVE games.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see the point of making ridulous remarks on this topic. If the initial poster did some statistical analysis to prove that Party "random" shuffles don't produce the expected results, then it is an alarming result and not funny in any way.

[/ QUOTE ]
It would be alarming if evidence were offered to support the allegation. Since nothing remotely resembling evidence had been offered, it's just another "Party is rigged" troll.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, one thing that is remarkable on Party Poker is the fact that people going all-in (limit) seem to hit miracle outers a lot.


[/ QUOTE ]

And you do, of course, have statistical evidence for this statement, correct?

P.S. You do get extra credit for being one of the 17 people on these forums who knows that "alot" is not a word. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, one thing that is remarkable on Party Poker is the fact that people going all-in (limit) seem to hit miracle outers a lot.


[/ QUOTE ]

And you do, of course, have statistical evidence for this statement, correct?

P.S. You do get extra credit for being one of the 17 people on these forums who knows that "alot" is not a word. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't quote the part in which I said I think it's just a coincidence [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

I've just seen it many times. But I think it's because people going all in would have folded if they would have had a big stack. So the chance of a bad beat grows because they stay in until the river.

Re: Party Poker RND shuffling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Having played for more than 3 years now on this site and collected over 500k hands. I am able to analyse many , many things.

The thing that I find really interesting is how these stats can be so far off from ´real´ poker stats.

[/ QUOTE ]

How far off? Please post examples or maybe the complete list of your observations.