My poker database has me convinced... - Page 6

_Towelie_ · #51 03-09-2007, 01:07 AM

Ok... my curiosity is peaked. I second the notion that someone from probability look this over and give an opinion.

TimWillTell · #52 03-09-2007, 01:09 AM

So these guys at Party come up with a devious plan to increase the action at a table by giving the players better starting hands to gain an extra buck in rake; putting their reputation and billion-dollar business at risk; and not taking in consideration that like 70% of their players use poker-tracker and surely several of those players are going to find some very strange statistics.

Especially in my early online poker-years I looked at my stats to see if I the Party dealer didn't stack the deck:
"He didn't!"

Surely there must be better explanations for these strange statistics of yours?

kyleb · #53 03-09-2007, 01:15 AM

Piqued.

BradleyT · #54 03-09-2007, 01:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and not taking in consideration that like 70% of their players use poker-tracker

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I'm sure Pat has sold over 2 million copies of PT.

VanVeen · #55 03-09-2007, 01:20 AM

my interest is more than piqued. would you be willing to make your hand histories by session public so we can check the time stamps, etc., to make sure you aren't omitting hands to 'rig' your data?

if you're interested in sending the hand histories out start with me. pm, please.

-vv

J_B · #56 03-09-2007, 01:23 AM

I do have a site that they could be placed on.

_Towelie_ · #57 03-09-2007, 01:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Piqued.

[/ QUOTE ]
nh sir

findingneema · #58 03-09-2007, 01:36 AM

If it's a hoax, it's a good one. Even the raw HHs won't be proof, since anyone with a decent knowledge of Perl could alter the HHs to make the hole cards looked juiced. Now, it'd be a [censored] way of spending a lot of time, but definitely possible. Either way, this isn't good.

stompin · #59 03-09-2007, 01:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
my interest is more than piqued. would you be willing to make your hand histories by session public so we can check the time stamps, etc., to make sure you aren't omitting hands to 'rig' your data?

if you're interested in sending the hand histories out start with me. pm, please.

-vv

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes VanVeen I have stated I'll offer up the histories.

I'm not sure its best to hand them to the first person that offers - not 100% sure it matters. Also I want to make sure this has legs first before disclosing my info..but it seems to be getting close.

Everyone,

I'm willing to send them out as soon as tomorrow by whatever means if that is deemed the right time. Any input as to best way to distribute them / validate them? who do you nominate to receive them? can they be hosted? are there other dB's we can compare against?

Phil153 · #60 03-09-2007, 01:50 AM

My best guess is that OP is trolling and has an extra filter in, which is why the numbers don't add up to 26,000. It's many times more likely than Party being this rigged.

Given the extraordinary claims being made, how about posting a screenshot of your entire stats windows for each piece of data? Obviously you can fake that too but it's a bit harder to do without slipping up.

Has anyone else checked their January stats? Until a long time poster or two can validate this with their own stats, the results mean nothing.

[ QUOTE ]
and not taking in consideration that like 70% of their players use poker-tracker and surely several of those players are going to find some very strange statistics.

[/ QUOTE ]
These number are so far out that it would take 10 million poker players billions of times the age of of the universe to get the results for AKo alone. My binomial calculator doesn't have enough digits to detemine exactly how far out this is; it stops at 10^-17 well before OP's numbers.