Received an email..
 

From a friend of mine who plays poker but not that much online. He wants me to comment on a study someone "supposedly did" on online poker.
1. Im not sure exactly what the study shows or is trying to show. Does any of this make sense
2. Were HU games around on UB for 19 months?
heres the email

i didn't tell you about a 19-month "study" that some friends of mine did with online poker

they had 2 bots playing with each other .. on like 2 or 3 sites... wont say what percent of hands were from which sites, but UB and FULL TILT where included

Anyway, they had the bots check down every hand

then they pulled the hands into pokertracker (its a program that I have and other people have that analyzes online poker hands, etc) ... they played a HUGE number of hands heads up with all hands being checked down .. no human intervention ....

you would expect that the preflop starting hands would have had win% consistent with what their win% is versus a random hand, right?

NOPE. ALL WERE WITHIN 15/1000 of 1 percent of each other. In other words, it appears that each hand had the same chance of prevailing preflop regardless of what the cards are, as long as nobody folds

pretty funny stuff, huh?



Now I have PT and I have a large number of hands and in comparison to some other data bases it looks pretty normal. Is this some kind of a scare email to online players? No hard numbers are listed so Im not really giving this much thought. Figured it might be entertaining in the Zoo....Thoughts?

Re: Received an email..
 

Damn idiots.

Re: Received an email..
 

Couple of points.

1 With out access to the database this means nothing.

2 I doubt that they're going to get any significant sample size checking every hand down before the site shuts them down. I sure hope the hell this would sets off reg flags on every major site.

Re: Received an email..
 

This is awesome.

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
Couple of points.

1 With out access to the database this means nothing.

2 I doubt that they're going to get any significant sample size checking every hand down before the site shuts them down. I sure hope the hell this would sets off reg flags on every major site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well why would the sites care about this inparticular. They arent taking and money from players. It seems the sites might want them to do this since they get rake from the blinds every hand. Assuming this acutlly took place which im pretty sure ddint

Re: Received an email..
 

Very few low limit games will be raked when the SB completes and the hand is checked down.

There is going to be some very stange plays(checking the nuts, etc) that should set off reg flags at least for money laundring reasons.

Re: Received an email..
 

So the argument is the sites would catch on and ban the accounts. I would agree.
How long have UB and FT offered HU cash games? Dont think its been as long as stated in the email? or am I wrong

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
It seems the sites might want them to do this since they get rake from the blinds every hand.

[/ QUOTE ]


If they took rake from them each hand then eventually they would go broke. Unless they just liked to donate a lot of money.

But just completing the SB and then checking it down is not going to generate any rake on certain limits.

Still, it seems unlikely that this actually happened and is just some stupid story meant to scare online players. It's not even a very good story.
This is so obviously ridiculous and made up.

They played for 19-months straight on the heads-up tables? Wow that's one really long study!!!


Sorry, can't help you on the heads-up tables on UB. Honestly don't remember.

Re: Received an email..
 

Yeah, this is obviously true. Please tell as many people as you can. Fantastic stories about rigged sites and bots are just what we need.

Plenty of posters here have large enough databases to conclusively know that there is nothing fishy about the card distribution at the major sites.

But then again, that's not the stuff of a good urban legend. Rigged sites detected by super sleuth check down bots is far more entertaining.

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]

then they pulled the hands into pokertracker (its a program that I have and other people have that analyzes online poker hands, etc)

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? Cool! I've never heard of this. Where can I get one?



[ QUOTE ]
you would expect that the preflop starting hands would have had win% consistent with what their win% is versus a random hand, right?

NOPE. ALL WERE WITHIN 15/1000 of 1 percent of each other. In other words, it appears that each hand had the same chance of prevailing preflop regardless of what the cards are, as long as nobody folds

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure this was the bozo that was spouting this nonsense a couple of weeks ago at a table I was at. It was funny then and it is funny now.

BO

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]

2 I doubt that they're going to get any significant sample size checking every hand down before the site shuts them down. I sure hope the hell this would sets off reg flags on every major site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Couldn't they just do this on the play money tables?

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

2 I doubt that they're going to get any significant sample size checking every hand down before the site shuts them down. I sure hope the hell this would sets off reg flags on every major site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Couldn't they just do this on the play money tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone knows the play money tables arent rigged. Im sure they didnt use those

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]


Couldn't they just do this on the play money tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Like duuuh. Play money clearly isn't rigged - there's no money in it for the sites.

Re: Received an email..
 

clearly, report the person who sent you the email for running a bot ring.

Re: Received an email..
 

This topic was forwarded to me as an online and brick N mortar player. I found it, and the responses interesting. Allow me to add my 2% of a dollar. I think I understand what the initial poster was saying. It appears as though a few of the responses indicated that they are confused. Without agreeing or disagreeing or commenting on any methodology, etc, here are some comments/responses to various statements made here:


"Now I have PT and I have a large number of hands and in comparison to some other data bases it looks pretty normal."

"Plenty of posters here have large enough databases to conclusively know that there is nothing fishy about the card distribution at the major sites"
---------------
I have PT and it looks normal as well. My distribution of starting hands appears to be within a reasonable margin of error. But, when it comes to analyzing the win % of hands, my database, just like yours, is the results of hands that were PLAYED and hence, the results are the results of MY PLAY of those hands, not the results of the PROGRAM if left to it's own devices. You might win 65% of the time with KJs, and I might win only 57% - that would have NOTHING TO DO with the program - that would only be attributable to the difference between how you and I play that particular hand. I mean, look - you could claim that ABCPOKER.COM is "rigged" because AA always loses, and produce PT database to back it up - because you could fold AA everytime you get dealt it. That's not the site's fault. I believe that is what the perpetrators of the bot excersize (assuming it was done) were trying to do - to rule out differences in playing ability and see what would happen if the program were left to its own devices to see if KJs won about 61.5% of the time (which is what is should against a random hand)
************************************************** *******

"I doubt that they're going to get any significant sample size checking every hand down"
-------------------------------------------------------
If the results of the non-played hands were as was claimed in the first poster, I don't know how large a sample you really need. After all, if I was flipping a coin against you for money and you had "tails" and 19 of the first 20 were "heads", while you might not have a large enough sample technically, realistically, you would probably suspect an unfair coin and want to gouge my eyes out
************************************************** *****
"How long have UB and FT offered HU cash games? Dont think its been as long as stated in the email? or am I wrong"
-------------------------------------------------
I think they have had heads up play for at least a couple of years. This could have been done in cash game or play money for that matter - I think the program is the program. I don't think these sites have different programming for tourneys, cash games, sitngo's, play chips ... I think anyone claiming that there are "action flops" to increase rake for cash games, for example, is NUTS.
************************************************** ********
"Really? Cool! I've never heard of this. Where can I get one?"
----------------------------------------
http://www.pokertracker.com/ it's a terrific program for analyzing your play and, if you want to track other people as well. Great tool for improving your game IF you have an open eye and are willing to look at stats and LISTEN to what they are saying. A must for any student of the game who plays enough online hands. Also has nice hand replay feature.
************************************************** ***
I guess if I wanted to test for something like this, I would use a bot too, after all ... how long would it take you to sit there and check down hands? I don't know what's involved in programming bots, but I imagine you could program one to just check with no additional time, so as to maximize the number of hands per hour to accumulate data. Also, if I was doing something like that, I wouldn't just have 2 bots set up shop at a table and just sit there for 3 weeks, 24 hours a day - for sure that would ring some kind of bell and I imagine the site would chuck it even if they were raking hands or whatever. Putting my dopy criminal hat on, it would make sense for someone to have the bots playing say, for a couple of hours here and a couple of hours there, and not every single day - and to collect the data over a long period of time. That would make sense versus trying to collect the data in one shot.

Re: Received an email..
 

"What do you mean I lost, I cant have, these sites are obviously rigged "

LOL @ people trying to justify why they have just lost when they are clearly the bestest bestest player in the whole universe ever, EVER!

While we are on conspiracy theories, what if Pokertracker etc are rigged. <GASPS>

Re: Received an email..
 

<font color="red">Im not sure I understand your post??? </font>


[ QUOTE ]
"What do you mean I lost, I cant have, these sites are obviously rigged "

LOL @ people trying to justify why they have just lost when they are clearly the bestest bestest player in the whole universe ever, EVER!

While we are on conspiracy theories, what if Pokertracker etc are rigged. &lt;GASPS&gt;

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
This topic was forwarded to me as an online and brick N mortar player. I found it, and the responses interesting. Allow me to add my 2% of a dollar.
...when it comes to analyzing the win % of hands, my database, just like yours, is the results of hands that were PLAYED and hence, the results are the results of MY PLAY of those hands, not the results of the PROGRAM if left to it's own devices.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is known as the Hathorne Effect -- which basically states that you cannot observe something without influencing the behavior you are examining thus to at least some degree minimizing the results you obtain...

Is that worth another 2%?

Re: Received an email..
 

very interesting ... I think it's also the definition of outplaying - and why the better player wins in the long run - because if all players were left to their own devices and just checking down hands, in the end all would be even ... in fact, you could just give people blank sheets of paper and whisper the names of cards in their ears and they will start to behave as though they are playing with a 52-card deck ... Its more like the Placebo effect

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This topic was forwarded to me as an online and brick N mortar player. I found it, and the responses interesting. Allow me to add my 2% of a dollar.
...when it comes to analyzing the win % of hands, my database, just like yours, is the results of hands that were PLAYED and hence, the results are the results of MY PLAY of those hands, not the results of the PROGRAM if left to it's own devices.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is known as the Hathorne Effect -- which basically states that you cannot observe something without influencing the behavior you are examining thus to at least some degree minimizing the results you obtain...

Is that worth another 2%?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Received an email..
 

Why is it that anyone who has a differing opinion regarding the randomness of the deal online considered an idiot?

The only idiot IMO is the one who just calls someone an idiot without trying to refute them logically.

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it that anyone who has a differing opinion regarding the randomness of the deal online considered an idiot?

The only idiot IMO is the one who just calls someone an idiot without trying to refute them logically.

[/ QUOTE ]

'cause there is a moron who come on this site every few days who:

a) claims that online poker is rigged

and

b) has never looked at any of the previous posts on the topic

and

c) thinks that they are the first person in the history of the world to ask this question

and

d) never, ever, ever, ever, provides any proof

and

e) expects people to have the same argument again and again

and

f) http://www.google.com.au/search?sourceid...woplustwo%2ecom shows 3,740 different pages on this site refer to something being rigged (not all of which relate directly to this issue, but the point is clear)

and

g) if you're playing poker, and you genuinely believe it to be rigged, a part of your brain must be broken to keep playing it

and

h) it is repetitive and boring

and

i) none of the "poker is rigged" claimants ever have anything new or interesting to say

and

j) it annoys me

and

k) claims that a friend told them; or that they have a database; or that they saw an email written by a guy who was told by a cousin of an employee of partypoker that it is rigged

and

l) never provides any of the details referred to in (k)

and

m) thinks that the only reason they are a losing player is because poker is rigged

and

n) never provides any intellectual support or logic for their position

and

o) probably believes in a series of other bizarre conspiracies

and

p) demands that other people do the intellectual work that the various claimants are clearly unsuitable for

and

q) wastes time of people reading and posting this forum

and

r) often manages to goad people into replying to their moronic ideas, and wastes their time (this is a particular problem for me)

and

s) refuses to listen to any reasoning against their point of view

and

t) never, ever, does any genuine research on the issue

and

u) often sulks when they don't get the answer they want

and

v) very rarely has made more than a handful of posts to this forum

and

x) almost never is a respected contributor to this forum

and

y) often fails to respond to the issues raised in the threads that they create

and

z) is just a general moron


If you genuinely cared about the issues involved here, you would put the effort in yourself into reading the literally thousands of other posts on this topic.

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
From a friend of mine who plays poker but not that much online. He wants me to comment on a study someone "supposedly did" on online poker.
1. Im not sure exactly what the study shows or is trying to show. Does any of this make sense
2. Were HU games around on UB for 19 months?
heres the email

i didn't tell you about a 19-month "study" that some friends of mine did with online poker

they had 2 bots playing with each other .. on like 2 or 3 sites... wont say what percent of hands were from which sites, but UB and FULL TILT where included

Anyway, they had the bots check down every hand

then they pulled the hands into pokertracker (its a program that I have and other people have that analyzes online poker hands, etc) ... they played a HUGE number of hands heads up with all hands being checked down .. no human intervention ....

you would expect that the preflop starting hands would have had win% consistent with what their win% is versus a random hand, right?

NOPE. ALL WERE WITHIN 15/1000 of 1 percent of each other. In other words, it appears that each hand had the same chance of prevailing preflop regardless of what the cards are, as long as nobody folds

pretty funny stuff, huh?



Now I have PT and I have a large number of hands and in comparison to some other data bases it looks pretty normal. Is this some kind of a scare email to online players? No hard numbers are listed so Im not really giving this much thought. Figured it might be entertaining in the Zoo....Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why dont you test this out at a money table. Just call all bets and see if you break even. BTW please let me know when you are ready to test this idea. I would like to watch.

Re: Received an email..
 

Josem, I agree on all of your points except for x)
[ QUOTE ]
x) almost never is a respected contributor to this forum

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that there has never, not almost never, been a case of a respected contributor to this forum saying online poker was rigged.

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that there has never, not almost never been a case of a respected contributor to this forum saying online poker was rigged.

[/ QUOTE ]

true.

sorry.

Re: Received an email..
 

Understand that I do not think online poker is rigged. I play far too much of it to think that way. I made this post for one reason. So people more intellegent then me could rip apart the emial so I could steal the ideas and sound smart to my friend that forwared to me.
Thanks for the comments

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]

<font color="red">Im not sure I understand your post??? </font>


[ QUOTE ]
"What do you mean I lost, I cant have, these sites are obviously rigged "

LOL @ people trying to justify why they have just lost when they are clearly the bestest bestest player in the whole universe ever, EVER!

While we are on conspiracy theories, what if Pokertracker etc are rigged. &lt;GASPS&gt;

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]



Sorry dude,

"What do you mean I lost, I cant have, these sites are obviously rigged "

This refers to what i believe people must think to throw around baseless accusations.

LOL @ people trying to justify why they have just lost when they are clearly the bestest bestest player in the whole universe ever, EVER!

An attampt at sarcasm. (obviously need to work on that one [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] )

And

While we are on conspiracy theories, what if Pokertracker etc are rigged. &lt;GASPS&gt;

If people can accuse pokersites of being rigged. In theory, they could have created this software to give people a false sense of security. (not my opinion, just being silly)

Re: Received an email..
 

Online Poker isn't rigged.
People who think that way do so because they are bad players and are trying to lay blame to whatever external scapegoat they can find.
Of course, the problem isn't *them* and their donkish play, its the site for rigging their hands. What fools.

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]
Online Poker isn't rigged.
People who think that way do so because they are bad players and are trying to lay blame to whatever external scapegoat they can find.
Of course, the problem isn't *them* and their donkish play, its the site for rigging their hands. What fools.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats what I was trying to get at, cheers.

me no working words good, brain hurting [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: Received an email..
 

oh my god .. I just had AK and it lost to A-10

MUST BE RIGGED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Received an email..
 

[ QUOTE ]

Why dont you test this out at a money table. Just call all bets and see if you break even. BTW please let me know when you are ready to test this idea. I would like to watch.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a corollary to this, you could be a winner at a rakeless game by moving in preflop every time (assuming other people will fold preflop at least sometimes).