Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

Again, I'm in no way claiming Stars is rigged. I actually don't get any more bad beats there than anywhere else I play...anyhow...

My question is how is there RNG used? I know that's pretty general...is there an RNG for each and every table? Or is there one RNG for the whole site? And, which would be better?

I'm wondering if high traffic amongst the tournies, and cash games could "alter" expected results?

I ask because I have a few friends that recently w/d all their money, and left Stars, and they say it's not rigged, but they think it could be screwed up because they get 3x as many bad beats there as any other place. I tell them not to focus on results, they say "Go F yourself, this is been happening for an entire year." I can't argue with them as I see them getting dogged my more one, two and three outters than imagineable over the course of about 12 months.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

This is not a rigged post? Right...

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

YFSSCKT

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

I mean, I'm not accusing them of being rigged. I don't think they are.

It's just a simple question, why do 2+2ers flame more than any other forum? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I mean, I'm not accusing them of being rigged. I don't think they are.

It's just a simple question, why do 2+2ers flame more than any other forum? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It might be because you said that you were not making a post about Stars being rigged and then made a post about Stars being rigged.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

How come there are more Stars rigged posts than Party?

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

From Pokerstars.com:

SHUFFLE

"Anyone who considers arithmetic methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin." - John von Neumann, 1951

We understand that a use of a fair and unpredictable shuffle algorithm is critical to our software. To ensure this and avoid major problems described in [2], we are using two independent sources of truly random data:

* user input, including summary of mouse movements and events timing, collected from client software
* true hardware random number generator developed by Intel [3], which uses thermal noise as an entropy source

Each of these sources itself generates enough entropy to ensure a fair and unpredictable shuffle.

Shuffle Highlights:

* A deck of 52 cards can be shuffled in 52! ways. 52! is about 2225. We use 249 random bits from both entropy sources (user input and thermal noise) to achieve an even and unpredictable statistical distribution.
* Furthermore, we apply conservative rules to enforce the required degree of randomness; for instance, if user input does not generate required amount of entropy, we do not start the next hand until we obtain the required amount of entropy from Intel RNG.
* We use the SHA-1 cryptographic hash algorithm to mix the entropy gathered from both sources to provide an extra level of security
* We also maintain a SHA-1-based pseudo-random generator to provide even more security and protection from user data attacks
* To convert random bit stream to random numbers within a required range without bias, we use a simple and reliable algorithm. For example, if we need a random number in the range 0-25:
o we take 5 random bits and convert them to a random number 0-31
o if this number is greater than 25 we just discard all 5 bits and repeat the process
* This method is not affected by biases related to modulus operation for generation of random numbers that are not 2n, n = 1,2,..
* To perform an actual shuffle, we use another simple and reliable algorithm:
o first we draw a random card from the original deck (1 of 52) and place it in a new deck - now original deck contains 51 cards and the new deck contains 1 card
o then we draw another random card from the original deck (1 of 51) and place it on top of the new deck - now original deck contains 50 cards and the new deck contains 2 cards
o we repeat the process until all cards have moved from the original deck to the new deck
* This algorithm does not suffer from "Bad Distribution Of Shuffles" described in [2]



PokerStars shuffle verified by Cigital and BMM International

In May 2003, PokerStars submitted extensive information about the PokerStars random number generator (RNG) to two independent organizations. We asked these two trusted resources to perform an in-depth analysis of the randomness of the output of the RNG, and its implementation in the shuffling of the cards on PokerStars.

Both independent companies were given full access to the source code and confirmed the randomness and security of our shuffle. Click here for more details.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

YSSCKY.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
52! is about 2225.

[/ QUOTE ]

On what planet did they get this from? Must be a typo in their document. Isn't this around 8e+67 or 8 quadgazillionbillion or so?

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
52! is about 2225.

[/ QUOTE ]

On what planet did they get this from? Must be a typo in their document. Isn't this around 8e+67 or 8 quadgazillionbillion or so?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm taking a wild guess and saying that the number didn't correctly translate when pasted into the 2+2 forums.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

52! = FIFTY TWO!

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

omg!!!

Where the heck do I say in my post that they are rigged?

At best I said that a friend thinks they might be screwed up. Never rigged. Rigged is intentional. Screwed up is unintentional.

One more time...for the mentally challenged...

I.did.not.say.they.were.rigged.nor.do.I.think.they .are.rigged.

Read it slowly.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

Oooooohhhh, so you mean stars is "unintentionally rigged"! Much better.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
My question is how is there RNG used? I know that's pretty general...is there an RNG for each and every table? Or is there one RNG for the whole site?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dedicated "entropy servers" feed the entire site. They are dedicated solely to generating the entropy needed for all of the tables on the site.

Jester

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
52! is about 2225.

[/ QUOTE ]

On what planet did they get this from? Must be a typo in their document. Isn't this around 8e+67 or 8 quadgazillionbillion or so?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm taking a wild guess and saying that the number didn't correctly translate when pasted into the 2+2 forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. The number on the page is 2^225. On the page, the 225 is in a superscript font, but when you cut and paste into plaintext here, the exponent doesn't come across.

Jester

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
How come there are more Stars rigged posts than Party?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's that 2 second delay for the last card.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Oooooohhhh, so you mean stars is "unintentionally rigged"! Much better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what adults did to some of you as children, but I pity you. I really feel bad for you.

Also, there is no such thing as "unintentionally rigged."

Seriously, why does 2+2 flame more than any forum? It's obvious that I do not think Stars is rigged.

"Equal" stop being jealous I took your girlfriend, and move on man. If I woulda known you would pull this type of crap, I would have left her alone. Grow up.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
How come there are more Stars rigged posts than Party?

[/ QUOTE ]

it is the 7th street LOGarithm.

they don't call it riverstars for nuttin'.


http://users.pandora.be/eforum/emoti...crazy/1088.gif


btw, you can disable it by typing <font color="red">ayemAmarIItardo </font>in the chatbox. this code IS case sensitive.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oooooohhhh, so you mean stars is "unintentionally rigged"! Much better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what adults did to some of you as children, but I pity you. I really feel bad for you.

Also, there is no such thing as "unintentionally rigged."

Seriously, why does 2+2 flame more than any forum? It's obvious that I do not think Stars is rigged.

"Equal" stop being jealous I took your girlfriend, and move on man. If I woulda known you would pull this type of crap, I would have left her alone. Grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am officially changing my earlier comment of "YFSSCKT" to "YSSCKY."
Good Day.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Equal" stop being jealous I took your girlfriend, and move on man. If I woulda known you would pull this type of crap, I would have left her alone. Grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Atleast team canada pulled off the victory last week. Those Canucks are gonna get their act together aswell.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
omg!!!

Where the heck do I say in my post that they are rigged?

At best I said that a friend thinks they might be screwed up. Never rigged. Rigged is intentional. Screwed up is unintentional.

One more time...for the mentally challenged...

I.did.not.say.they.were.rigged.nor.do.I.think.they .are.rigged.

Read it slowly.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said "more one, two and three outters than imagineable over the course of about 12 months". If you would care to explain how this could be done without intent, I'm all ears. If you can't do so, then we are left with intent on someone's part (if what you say is true, which it isn't). If there was intent, then this is a post about rigging. It appears to me that your continued existence is wasting oxygen that might better be used by more productive humans (like death row inmates or telemarketers).

Do you not understand that many, many people complain about non-random results on poker sites? Do you not understand that they have been provided over and over again with mathematical demonstrations from huge sets of data showing that this non-randomness is simply not taking place? Do you not understand why it might get irritating?

You knew that it was irritating, as shown by the fact that you tricked us into reading your post in the first place by claiming that it wasn't about rigging. This multiplies the irritation factor.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

Granny dont ever stop with the smilies-very nice work!

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
omg!!!

Where the heck do I say in my post that they are rigged?

At best I said that a friend thinks they might be screwed up. Never rigged. Rigged is intentional. Screwed up is unintentional.

One more time...for the mentally challenged...

I.did.not.say.they.were.rigged.nor.do.I.think.they .are.rigged.

Read it slowly.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said "more one, two and three outters than imagineable over the course of about 12 months". If you would care to explain how this could be done without intent, I'm all ears. If you can't do so, then we are left with intent on someone's part (if what you say is true, which it isn't). If there was intent, then this is a post about rigging. It appears to me that your continued existence is wasting oxygen that might better be used by more productive humans (like death row inmates or telemarketers).

Do you not understand that many, many people complain about non-random results on poker sites? Do you not understand that they have been provided over and over again with mathematical demonstrations from huge sets of data showing that this non-randomness is simply not taking place? Do you not understand why it might get irritating?

You knew that it was irritating, as shown by the fact that you tricked us into reading your post in the first place by claiming that it wasn't about rigging. This multiplies the irritation factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it you only read and understand what you WANT the post to say.

1. I said I don't get any more bad beats then normal.
2. The people that actually do receive them HAVE been receiving more than normal, AND I DON'T THINK THE F**KING SITE IS RIGGED!!!
3. How many more times do I have to say that I don't think the site is rigged before you understand that I.don't.think.the.site.is.rigged?

I mean, dude, what is a person supposed to do when they even TELL you that they don't think something, and because you are so ATTACHED to the idea that I think Stars is rigged, you just will not listen to me when I say that...I don't think Pokerstars is rigged?

I really don't know what to say other than....I realize that Pokerstars is not rigged, I merely had a question about their MF'ing RNG, and IF an RNG could be done differently (if that's even possible) or handled differently from site to site in such a way that one RNG could be faulty whereas another RNG is not faulty? Just a freaking question.

It's so amazing that of all the forums out there, this is the only one that has SO many people like you that instead of helping, want to take people's words and twist them, and fight and argue. I mean, the forum is a place to discuss ideas. And, while I would never want to discuss "riggedness" with someone (since I don't f**king think ANY site is rigged) I would like to know something about the SPECIFIC issue I brought forth which ONLY is about RNG's, and not "riggedness."

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
omg!!!

Where the heck do I say in my post that they are rigged?

At best I said that a friend thinks they might be screwed up. Never rigged. Rigged is intentional. Screwed up is unintentional.

One more time...for the mentally challenged...

I.did.not.say.they.were.rigged.nor.do.I.think.they .are.rigged.

Read it slowly.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said "more one, two and three outters than imagineable over the course of about 12 months". If you would care to explain how this could be done without intent, I'm all ears. If you can't do so, then we are left with intent on someone's part (if what you say is true, which it isn't). If there was intent, then this is a post about rigging. It appears to me that your continued existence is wasting oxygen that might better be used by more productive humans (like death row inmates or telemarketers).

Do you not understand that many, many people complain about non-random results on poker sites? Do you not understand that they have been provided over and over again with mathematical demonstrations from huge sets of data showing that this non-randomness is simply not taking place? Do you not understand why it might get irritating?

You knew that it was irritating, as shown by the fact that you tricked us into reading your post in the first place by claiming that it wasn't about rigging. This multiplies the irritation factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it you only read and understand what you WANT the post to say.

1. I said I don't get any more bad beats then normal.
2. The people that actually do receive them HAVE been receiving more than normal, AND I DON'T THINK THE F**KING SITE IS RIGGED!!!
3. How many more times do I have to say that I don't think the site is rigged before you understand that I.don't.think.the.site.is.rigged?

I mean, dude, what is a person supposed to do when they even TELL you that they don't think something, and because you are so ATTACHED to the idea that I think Stars is rigged, you just will not listen to me when I say that...I don't think Pokerstars is rigged?

I really don't know what to say other than....I realize that Pokerstars is not rigged, I merely had a question about their MF'ing RNG, and IF an RNG could be done differently (if that's even possible) or handled differently from site to site in such a way that one RNG could be faulty whereas another RNG is not faulty? Just a freaking question.

It's so amazing that of all the forums out there, this is the only one that has SO many people like you that instead of helping, want to take people's words and twist them, and fight and argue. I mean, the forum is a place to discuss ideas. And, while I would never want to discuss "riggedness" with someone (since I don't f**king think ANY site is rigged) I would like to know something about the SPECIFIC issue I brought forth which ONLY is about RNG's, and not "riggedness."

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you just hate flamers

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

The big flaw with your post is that you're saying something is wrong with the RNG, but it's not intentional. The reason being that people seem to get more bad beats on pokerstars than other places. Here's the problem though: Unless the bad beats are intentional(ie. Pokerstars gives certain people more bad beats than others), then by your own words, your friends should be giving as many bad beats as they are receiving. Of course, good players will give less bad beats than bad ones because they are more likely to put their chips in with the best of it, but even good players need those 2 outers.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

Jackaaron -

If you can't see the absurdity of your post, then you shouldn't be posting in this forum in the first place. I can't believe you "corrected" him with "unintentional rigging" doesn't exist, when it was clear as day that he was mocking you.

2+2 should just auto-ban posters that bitch about rigging and "bad downswings" that are less than 10k hands.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jackaaron -

If you can't see the absurdity of your post, then you shouldn't be posting in this forum in the first place. I can't believe you "corrected" him with "unintentional rigging" doesn't exist, when it was clear as day that he was mocking you.

2+2 should just auto-ban posters that bitch about rigging and "bad downswings" that are less than 10k hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

They pretty much do

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]

It's just a simple question, why do 2+2ers flame more than any other forum? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Because this is probably one of the most intelligent poker forums out there. If we agreed or supported your OP, we wouldn't be above other forums. If you don't like it, go post at your other forums where you will get responses like "Yeah! Me too! My pocket aces lost, it's totally rigged!"

Yes, I know, you didn't say it was rigged. Time to move on.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

OP, if it makes you feel any better, I definitely get bad beats more frequently on Stars than anywhere else. After playing there and at many other sites for well over a year, I really don't think I'm imagining it anymore.

I don't think it's rigged in favor of any particular players, but I do think there's something in the software that favors the underdog of any given situation.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

jackaaron...

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/1588/bitch0jp.png

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
jackaaron...

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/1588/bitch0jp.png

[/ QUOTE ]

So, not only do flamers think that battered women are funny, they like to threaten me because I won't back down. Because I've been misunderstood by people that only want to hear what they want to hear, you have idiots like this who post pictures of battered women.

Nice, dude. Did your dad beat your mom?

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

All I asked was a simple question folks.

I'll rephrase the same question, "can the "math" related to the RNG and all it's components get screwed up with a higher population of players (say 60k+) at a site?"

Simple, very simple question. Stars can get the most traffic, it seems (I don't play PP), and you hear the most complaints of beats on Stars. Faulty logical connection? Fine. Say so. Why flame when you can post intelligently (since this is the most intelligent forum on the net with regard to poker)?

It's just a simple question.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

Yes, there is a vast conspiracy against you. All of 2+2 is rigged to flame you. The 20 (+1 now) people here who think this post is ridiculous and pointless are ALL wrong and have a personal vendetta against you.

BTW, your question about the RNG was answered on page 1. Can we just move along now?

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
jackaaron...

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/1588/bitch0jp.png

[/ QUOTE ]

So, not only do flamers think that battered women are funny, they like to threaten me because I won't back down. Because I've been misunderstood by people that only want to hear what they want to hear, you have idiots like this who post pictures of battered women.

Nice, dude. Did your dad beat your mom?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you are devoid of a sense of humor.

If you have been posting here or lurking long enough you should realize that any post discussing even the "possible" rigged-"ness" of a particular site will always be flamed. I agree some people here are a little quick to flame. But i can't imagine you believing that there would be a serious discussion about whether stars is more rigged, or unintentionally rigged due to some various factors.

Stars, party, full tilt etc are not rigged in anyway period. This forum will never entertain a discussion regarding these sites being rigged in any form simply because its a ludicrous notion and something that has never been proven.

Simply saying that this is not a rigged post and that you don't think its rigged, won't allow you to escape from the inevitable flamings.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

Furthermore, it has been mentioned numerous times in the past that "rigged" posts or things of that nature are, in general, detrimental to the so-called "poker economy." Think about it: The good/expert/experienced players know better, so they will ignore such notions. But what if the fish/less-experienced players came to believe that the games were rigged or in some way not "fair?" It couldn't possibly be good for the rest of us. I believe this is, in part, a sufficient explanation for why you (OP) and anyone else who posts topics of this nature would be flamed almost instantly.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]

Simply saying that this is not a rigged post and that you don't think its rigged, won't allow you to escape from the inevitable flamings.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, even though I think it's not rigged, and I say I don't think it's rigged not only in the header, but even in my post that I don't think they're rigged, you still think that I think it's rigged?

...lol. Amazing.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Simply saying that this is not a rigged post and that you don't think its rigged, won't allow you to escape from the inevitable flamings.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, even though I think it's not rigged, and I say I don't think it's rigged not only in the header, but even in my post that I don't think they're rigged, you still think that I think it's rigged?

...lol. Amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just don't get it, do you? You claim to not think that it's rigged, but the very issue you describe dances around the idea that there is something rigged about Stars, even though you don't use those exact words.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

And he won't get it. But that picture is just wrong lol. Terrible. WTF is wrong with people these days? This thread is a disaster. End. It.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

[ QUOTE ]


Wow, you are devoid of a sense of humor.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't particularly find humor about battered women funny either, but that's not the point.

The OP put "(not a rigged post)" in the topic header. He didn't put "(I don't think it's rigged)", but he talked about his friends thinking that it's rigged because of the number of 2 or 3 outers. The OP is on crack. 'Nuff said. That's why he's getting flames for putting a rigged post in a topic where he claims it's not a rigged post. So while he might not think it's rigged, it's still a damn rigged post.

Re: Pokerstars RNG (not a rigged post)
 

That sh*t is uncalled for. Don't say things on forums you wouldn't say in person you little b*tch