Organizing a project to determine which sites are legit or rigged

[NANONUTS]

I would like to know where you are getting this $400M figure from, I can't find any info on pokerstars financial affairs on the net.
Anyway whatever profit they are making, if they are using balancing they would be making a significantly smaller amount without it. If as you say they are making 400M and they have balanced software who knows how much of that 400M is due to keeping the fish in the game longer. Alot more than 5% I'd expect as if a fish is around twice as long (or more) he will be paying twice as much rake to the site.

And it is not easy to detect, as has been explained, to investigate and come to an agreement on this you would need millions of hands from winning players, no-one is forthcoming with this data. You would obviously need separate data from different sites as each site would be looked at independantly. Then you would need a group involved in the EV calculation, that includes respected longtime 2+2 posters, so that the result cannot be discredited by claims that it is biased.
As for a B&M casino owner, why would they want to go up against the online sites? The online boom has helped the casinos no end, I know loads of people who have travelled half way across the world to play in Vegas that wouldn't have done so, or even have taken up poker, if they hadn't started playing online. Both B&M and online compliment each other they are not in competition.

[Henry17]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to know where you are getting this $400M figure from, I can't find any info on pokerstars financial affairs on the net.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm extrapolating from Party's profit. Since they Party is a publicly traded company they have to publish annual reports.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway whatever profit they are making, if they are using balancing they would be making a significantly smaller amount without it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. If you had spent any amount of time in poker rooms you'd know fish never quit. They may run out of money but as soon as they get paid they are right back at the tables.

[ QUOTE ]
And it is not easy to detect, as has been explained, to investigate and come to an agreement on this you would need millions of hands from winning players, no-one is forthcoming with this data.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. It is very very simple to test. It does not require anyone to share their hands. The whole process would take less then 2 days.

[NANONUTS]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm extrapolating from Party's profit. Since they Party is a publicly traded company they have to publish annual reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.partygaming.com/investor/...l_summary.html

Party's net profit last year was $128M as it says on their site. And last year Party was bigger than Pokerstars so Pokerstars would've made nowhere near $400M. Party is obviously going to be making alot less this year without the US players, and I would imagine Pokerstars would too although I don't play there so I don't really know how much their traffic was affected.


[ QUOTE ]

Not really. If you had spent any amount of time in poker rooms you'd know fish never quit. They may run out of money but as soon as they get paid they are right back at the tables.


[/ QUOTE ]
I've been a pro for the last 3 years, I've seen the fish who keep coming back and losing. I've also had my brother who works for a poker site run checks on certain players to see how much they are down and there are some guys who are losing a fortune month in month out. But these guys are the exceptions and eventually they go broke too and are not seen again. The vast majority of fish are gone in a few days, weeks, maybe months. No matter how long it takes for them though, the fact is that if they lost at half the rate they should lose at they would play for longer. It's a pity the fish didn't just keep coming back and dumping their wages as that is the main reason, along with legislation in the US, that the games have gotten significatnly harder in the last 9 months. If you had spent any amount of time in poker rooms you would notice the different names appearing every few weeks and other ones disappearing never to be seen again.



[ QUOTE ]
Nope. It is very very simple to test. It does not require anyone to share their hands. The whole process would take less then 2 days.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a simple test when you get everything together. It's getting all the data together and getting the long time respected posters to lend it credibility that is the problem. I don't see anybody coming forward with the data to do the test. If you have the data, the program to test it would be fairly basic and could be quickly coded.

And of course you would need people to share and co-operate on this operation, otherwise it's all coming from one person and has zero credibility. It was hard enough to convince some people in the Absolute thread even with all the big pros agreeing with the evidence.

[Henry17]

[ QUOTE ]

Party's net profit last year was $128M as it says on their site. And last year Party was bigger than Pokerstars so Pokerstars would've made nowhere near $400M. Party is obviously going to be making a lot less this year without the US players, and I would imagine Pokerstars would too although I don't play there so I don't really know how much their traffic was affected.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look at Party's 04 and 05 income statement you'll find it is much higher. It was 337M in 04 and 293M in 05. I use to play on Party in 04 and Stars is bigger now then Party was in 04.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nope. It is very very simple to test. It does not require anyone to share their hands. The whole process would take less then 2 days.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a simple test when you get everything together. It's getting all the data together and getting the long time respected posters to lend it credibility that is the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

That makes no sense. Someone can be a respected poster and no nothing about statistical analysis.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see anybody coming forward with the data to do the test. If you have the data, the program to test it would be fairly basic and could be quickly coded.

[/ QUOTE ]

What program to test it? I have no idea what you are talking about. There is no "Is this poker data fair?" software.

[ QUOTE ]
And of course you would need people to share and co-operate on this operation, otherwise it's all coming from one person and has zero credibility. It was hard enough to convince some people in the Absolute thread even with all the big pros agreeing with the evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone who plays regularly has sufficient data to test. Instead of getting people to contribute data you'd be much better off getting a group of people to test their own data. That way there is no issue of sharing confidential information and you get confirmation for several sources.

[ryanj247]

[ QUOTE ]

Everyone who plays regularly has sufficient data to test. Instead of getting people to contribute data you'd be much better off getting a group of people to test their own data. That way there is no issue of sharing confidential information and you get confirmation for several sources.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would like to do this. but i need someone to detail the specific procedure i need to follow.

[nineinchal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Everyone who plays regularly has sufficient data to test. Instead of getting people to contribute data you'd be much better off getting a group of people to test their own data. That way there is no issue of sharing confidential information and you get confirmation for several sources.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would like to do this. but i need someone to detail the specific procedure i need to follow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will be requesting information for this purpose once we are ready to process it.

I believe accepting hand histories from posters at this point is premature. It will take some time to get a team in place that can determine what type of procedures will be implemented. Moreover, I remain uncertain as to exactly what is required. Right now there is a lack of human resources who are coordinated in their efforts, since this idea was created by nineinch just yesterday.

First and foremost I want to have integrity, honesty and accuracy as the primary purpose of this endeavor. Otherwise it will be totally useless to all of us.

In the interim you got to chill. Either chill, or start posting your resumes.

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
Party's net profit last year was $128M as it says on their site. And last year Party was bigger than Pokerstars so Pokerstars would've made nowhere near $400M

[/ QUOTE ]
PS at its peak is the same size as Party at its peak, infact I think slightly larger now because Party had a well defined time when they had the most players on, whilst PS has a couple as they have so many more Euro players now than Party ever did.

[Big DP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm extrapolating from Party's profit. Since they Party is a publicly traded company they have to publish annual reports.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.partygaming.com/investor/...l_summary.html

Party's net profit last year was $128M as it says on their site. And last year Party was bigger than Pokerstars so Pokerstars would've made nowhere near $400M. Party is obviously going to be making alot less this year without the US players, and I would imagine Pokerstars would too although I don't play there so I don't really know how much their traffic was affected.


[ QUOTE ]

Not really. If you had spent any amount of time in poker rooms you'd know fish never quit. They may run out of money but as soon as they get paid they are right back at the tables.


[/ QUOTE ]
I've been a pro for the last 3 years, I've seen the fish who keep coming back and losing. I've also had my brother who works for a poker site run checks on certain players to see how much they are down and there are some guys who are losing a fortune month in month out. But these guys are the exceptions and eventually they go broke too and are not seen again. The vast majority of fish are gone in a few days, weeks, maybe months. No matter how long it takes for them though, the fact is that if they lost at half the rate they should lose at they would play for longer. It's a pity the fish didn't just keep coming back and dumping their wages as that is the main reason, along with legislation in the US, that the games have gotten significatnly harder in the last 9 months. If you had spent any amount of time in poker rooms you would notice the different names appearing every few weeks and other ones disappearing never to be seen again.



[ QUOTE ]
Nope. It is very very simple to test. It does not require anyone to share their hands. The whole process would take less then 2 days.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a simple test when you get everything together. It's getting all the data together and getting the long time respected posters to lend it credibility that is the problem. I don't see anybody coming forward with the data to do the test. If you have the data, the program to test it would be fairly basic and could be quickly coded.

And of course you would need people to share and co-operate on this operation, otherwise it's all coming from one person and has zero credibility. It was hard enough to convince some people in the Absolute thread even with all the big pros agreeing with the evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread cracks me up. The goal of this thread is to start a project to determine if sites are legit or not and in it contains (bolded statement above if true) a possible huge security flaw which I would view very troubling, but no one in this thread makes a comment about it.

Very strange.....

What this poster possibly unknowingly admitted to was obtaining "insider information" which gave him an edge. Who needs a fish finder when poker site's employees are tipping players off?

And if the sites are willing to share this information with some players, what else will they share?

I started another thread about this, but it just died with no interest.

Sometimes the cheating is in a very simple form right under our noses but we are trying to create some complicated project to determine something far more nefarious and complex is occurring.