Pokerstars Is Fixed

[ropeadope]

First, I find it funny that people ridicule this so much b/c it is clearly a serious enough issue that it gets more attention than most other posts.

I have been playing 1.5 years. Started at 1/2 and now play mostly 20/40 limit, some low limit NL, and various tourneys. I have been a winning player since the beginning.

Like our poster, I used to think online poker was rigged (especially Party). I used PT(sample size >100K) to perform some rudimentary analysis, (ex. how often certain hands are dealt, how often they win 2, 3, 4 handed etc.) and found that they conform so closely to what is mathematically expected that it is impossible to conclude that online poker is rigged.

Secondly, logical analysis of the possible motives behind rigging are absurd. The arguments I have heard and my responses are:

1--Juice the pot to increase the rake: just plain silly. Rake is already a monster for the sites.

2--The programmers are nerdy, sadistic SOBs that are trying to exact revenge on us players: also just plain silly but a humorous thought.

3--Keep the fish from losing it all and reduce the edge of the winners. This argument has some plausability, but if you consider how easy it would be to prove that the sites are not fair, and what they and their auditors have to losethis too is just silly. Risk/reward just isnt there.

If its any consolation to you, I have felt exactly what you are going through, and so has every player I have talked to...but its just that the number of hands you play is so great, that more wierd stuff happens. Playing live is a good antidote to this.

[snake_oiler]

laugh all you want, but it is rigged. last week i lost twice with AA. everyone knows that if you can't win with AA, the game is rigged. once i can understand, but twice? no way.

you want more proof? yesterday i won at partypoker with AA. obviously partypoker is not rigged. although i kinda' wonder because i had a string of about 14 unplayable hands. i usually see the flop 17% of the time which means i should have been dealt at least 2 playable hands. i didn't even get one. do the math. tell me i'm wrong.

p.s. any chance the moderator could write a little routine that automatically deletes all "rigged/fixed" posts that don't include data for atleast 30,000 hands from poker tracker or poker office? that would be cool.

[Robbie01]

Hi all
Ok so here we go again online poker is rigged blah blah here is my opinion again. i dont think online poker is rigged because odds wise anything can happen. you might be 85 percent favourite or even 99 percent favourite there is no reason for you to lose that hand a million times before you win. think about it people beat lottery odds of 25 million to 1 and then you complain because a 2 outer hits the river cmon people lets face it its poker 2 outers are supposed to hit its no big deal at all. all in all you could have bad beats for the rest of your life and thats normal remember nobody gets anywere in cards or life without luck tx

[mmctrab]

Somebody posted the same exact thing on Full Tilt, and the response was that all of these sites are overseen by regulators and the sites are not fixed. It's easy to come to the conclusion that these sites are rigged when you see all this weird stuff happening. For example, the other day I was dealt pocket 3s two hands in a row. I was dealt AK two hands in a row. I was dealt J8 two hands in a row. All of this is low probability, but it doesn't mean it's impossible. People don't understand probabilities, and they also overestimate their skill levels, so they don't understand how they could possibly be losing. Thus, the game must be fixed.

[JCCARL]

[ QUOTE ]
Somebody posted the same exact thing on Full Tilt, and the response was that all of these sites are overseen by regulators and the sites are not fixed. It's easy to come to the conclusion that these sites are rigged when you see all this weird stuff happening. For example, the other day I was dealt pocket 3s two hands in a row. I was dealt AK two hands in a row. I was dealt J8 two hands in a row. All of this is low probability, but it doesn't mean it's impossible. People don't understand probabilities, and they also overestimate their skill levels, so they don't understand how they could possibly be losing. Thus, the game must be fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]
tldr
Live play is also fixed.

[JJNJustin]

The sites are not fixed, they are broken. They need to be fixed.

-J

[snake_oiler]

i dunno if i should start a new thread, but HOLLYWOOD POKER IS FIXED TOO. this morning i had 4-of a kind jacks and this afternoon i got a straight flush ON THE FLOP. what are the odds of THAT, in one day? (maybe 300 hands)...

ok so MAYBE that was just coincidence...BUT, 'splain this: i got both those hands after saying "dammit, i'm not playing here anymore, this place is fixed." obviously hollywood was monitoring my losses and threw me a monster hand just when i was about to quit, so they could keep making money off me.

can someone tell me if pokerstars is MORE fixed than hollywood? cuz if it is, i may go back to playing there. maybe we can start a scale of how fixed each site is? you know, so that if you want to play at a really-fixed site or a really-really-super-fixed-site or if you're just in the mood for kinda'-little-bit-fixed-but-not-so-much you can come here and pick one.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]

Thus, a broad largescale analysis of thousands of hands won't answer my question. What I want to know is what is the statistical likelihood that a huge underdog of less than 10% wins greater then 75/100 hands, not just once, but repeteadly in spurts over a large sample.



[/ QUOTE ]

you dont understand statistics in the least.

the likelihood of those events you just described occuring in a large enough sample approaches unity as the sample approaches infinity.

in otherwords, it is virtually guarateed that an underdog of <10% wins >75% in streaks.

and guess what? those streaks will occur repeatedly as you continue to play.

Barron