|
|
#61
08-25-2006, 06:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] We all have seen weird things, gone on long winning and losing streaks. How come nobody ever says "OMG it's rigged! My 10% favorites are winning 75% of the time!!", "I never lose!!" All these it's rigged post always come after a bad downswing which can ALWAYS be explained by variance and bad play. [/ QUOTE ] I just wanted to comment that this is precisely what I was saying. I'm just as likely to claim the sites are fixed when I'm winning as when I'm losing. There are times when I can't lose and i acknowledged that. I just dont put quite as bad beats on people as I take because I'm generally only playing strong hands to begin with. I believe it all evens out in the end, just that streaks seem to be too consistently extreme to be believable 
|
|
#64
08-25-2006, 06:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
you remember the times you lose.
the times that you win you often don't get to see your opponent's hole-cards if you bet the river and they fold (or they muck at showdown and you don't check the HH). Lots of times when people say they lost to a 10%'er they really lost to a 35%'er. Lots of people try to justify their losses with claims that they can obviously tell that the cards just aren't 'realistic' compared to a hand-dealt game. It is the paranoia that creeps into people's heads when they think they should be winning but they aren't COMBINED with the fact that they can't see actual cards be shuffled and dealt. I played a tournament a couple nights ago in which I won decent-sized pots getting AA on back to back hands. Awesome. After the tournament was over I played a little no-limit and on the same table I hit a set of 4's twice within the same orbit to pull-in a couple decent sized-pots. One of these sets of 4's I got shown AA by my opponent. When hands like these happen online it is pretty common for somebody to complain how stupid the cards run because things repeating themselves like that are just not realistic. "LOL, this site sucks and the cards don't run right." By the way, all these hands (back to back AA, and sets of 4's a few minutes apart at the same table) were all at a live game. And there are plenty of people in the live-games who believe in requesting the dealer to change the deck after they get dealt 72o for 3 hands in a row. (or will change seats NOT because they want better position on a bad player...but because the cards they are getting in that seat ar particularly bad). There are lots of reasons why a site could rig the games. But to rig them in such a way that each individual player does nothing but lose or win at the same time at all 6 tables he is playing on would accomplish WHAT exactly?? And I agree with Zetack that IF a site were going to rig the games they would want to do it in a way that would NOT be detected by the player. Those who say that they can 'just tell' that the cards are not running the way they should are usually (always) trying to justify their losses or bad play. Most people do not play poker particularly well. Most of these people CLAIM that they are in the minority that actually know how to play well.
|
|
#65
08-25-2006, 07:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
No, Microbob. NO NO NO NO NO NO!!! Don't try to use your circular logic on me, sir.
I am losing, so party is RIGGED!!! It really isn't any more complicated than that.
|
|
#67
08-25-2006, 08:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
Ooey, gooey, rich and chewy inside
Golden flakey, tender cakey outside! Wrap the inside in the outside, is it good? Darn tootin! Do the fig, fig, newton!
|
|
#68
08-26-2006, 04:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The fact that poker sites readily offer you hand history files to obleviate fears of "rigging"- should demonstrate the importance they place on providing a fair game. [/ QUOTE ] i find this more relevant, and i agree. [/ QUOTE ] This is such a ridiculous statement. So, dr. Statistics, have you ran an analysis on these hand histories and can say with X percent confidence that everything is on the level? [/ QUOTE ] No one said that Hand Histories have been used to actually prove it's not rigged. I did say "They offer you hand histories to show they have nothing to hide". They don't have to do that do they? Ian
|
|
#69
08-26-2006, 05:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The weird thing is that these things should be extremely unlikely. As a 90% favorite you should win 90 out of 100 times. Why do I lose such situations so often? Yesterday they dealt me five NL hands on Stars from which I played two: Lost with trips in the first one and lost with top pair + nut flush draw in the second one (all-in on the flop). Outcome: - $96! In one day I lose like $500 on Party, PS and WPEX combined and all of that with huge hands. Not the usual bad beat stuff, it was more like an endless streak of cold decks which is much more expensive. [/ QUOTE ] This whole thread is insane. Is it "3-4 times as often"? Please show us real numbers. You should be able to tell for sure. If you can't there is your answer. Guys, is it possible as site is rigged? Sure. But, nothing stated on the "for" side in this thread gives even a hint of evidence. I keep hearing words like "my confidence", "I think", "should", "It seems like". These are all vague, give one bit of concrete evidence and maybe your case would hold more water. 90% and above favorites DO LOSE as they should. Nobody has shown they lose more than they are statistically supposed to. We all have seen weird things, gone on long winning and losing streaks. How come nobody ever says "OMG it's rigged! My 10% favorites are winning 75% of the time!!", "I never lose!!" All these it's rigged post always come after a bad downswing which can ALWAYS be explained by variance and bad play. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think that the sites are rigged, I just think that Hold'em has more variance than poker authors and the "superstars" want us to believe. They preach that you will win if you make good decisions, but especially in limit with all the schooling going on there, these expert plays simply don't make that much of a difference. Personally, and this is just a guess, I would estimate the skill factor in HE at 10% and the short term luck factor at 90%. Maybe the ratio is even worse. Certainly it's not the other way around. Actually I am thinking about switching to O8 because of this. I want a mathematical game where the idiots who keep pumping the pot can only hurt themselves. P.S.: Hand histories cannot prove anything because for every case of bad luck the winner of that hand could also use it to show how lucky you can get on the very same site.
|
|
#70
08-26-2006, 06:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerstars Is Fixed
your theories on experts not having much of an advantage in hold-em is flawed.
Most good authors to emphasize that the long-run is pretty long...but perhaps some don't emphasize this as much as they should for newer players. expert plays do reap big dividends when applied correctly. The thing is, lots of players who think they are right there with the experts actually are not and they are mis-applying their supposedly expert plays. The idea that limit hold-em is just a bunch of 18/10 type TAG's who pass their money around, pull in rake-back, and hope for a fish or two to come to their table is an extremely flawed theory. The 18/11/1.8 -$500k guy is FURTHER proof that one can have reasonable looking stats and look like they are playing a mostly decent game (not mega-fishy capping 42o unimproved to the river type of donk) and still suck at poker. Or, at least, can convince themsvles that they are really good at poker and that they can easily beat higher stakes. Yes, hold-em has a high luck factor in the short-run. But it is REALLY freaking beatable in the long-run. It is necessary that you know how to play a bit more than just raising with AK pre-flop though.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
