Why does it seem like the cards are not random?

[ibluffoldladies]

Thanks math! I realize the thread was ridiculous but it was a serious question. I've always wondered about it when the study was brought up.

[nath]

So what you're saying is, sometimes you hit your draws, and make more money then, and sometimes you don't, and you lose money then?

...how is that not random?

[HustlerLA]

"My favorite example of this error is the "hot hand" in basketball. We all "know" that at times a player will get a "hot hand" such that he is more likely to make his next shot than he would normally be. But a careful statistical analysis shows that this is false."

The hot hand effect is real and is many other similar events. The player's form is really in tune at the moment and his confidence is at a high, which is key to success in any physical act. So I disagree with your example.

And not that this has any validity to the converstaion, but last session I got dealt QQ and AA within fifteen hands and flopped quads both times. Go me.

[keikiwai]

if you made the same amount on every table.... that wouldn't be very [censored] RANDOM would it?

[h11]

[ QUOTE ]
h11,

Could you explain why many scientific breakthroughs are found by noticing patterns? To say that humans cannot accurately pick out patterns is an intellectual insult. I'm not saying the OP is correct, I'm just curious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most scientific theories don't pan out as correct. Linus Pauling had a very smart theory - Vitamin C will cure the common cold. It so happens that was not true. But it's good that Pauling had that theory because if even one in ten of his theories pan out - we cure a disease. The cost of "spotting" a pattern which is not there is low. The gain from spotting one which is there is great. So we "overspot." We are rich in false positives, and that's not a bad thing.

[Enervate]

[ QUOTE ]
Simple Explanation: Online poker is rigged.

Seriously though, online poker IS rigged at Absolute, but if you're playing poker on a different site, then it's just randomness.

Scientists have studied humans and found that humans simply CANNOT understand randomness and that they always look for patterns or create patterns. I.e., there is a famous experiment where humans are asked to pick out what list of "Head-Tails" is the random one from two lists. One a human made up and "randomly" wrote down some long list of "H, H, H, T, T, H, T, H, T, T, T, T, H, H, ..." and the other list is ACTUAL RECORDED DATA of a fair coin being flipped. The people almost always pick the wrong list, because the actual recorded data has a few parts that go something like this: "H, H, H, H, H, H, H, H, H, H, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, H, ..." and the people that look at it go "That simply CANNOT be random!"

[/ QUOTE ]

No intelligence in BBV

[CroMagnon]

Had an abnormal Psych teacher do an experiemnt with the class. We could ask 20 questions to which he would answer yes or no. We would then write down what he was thinking about. We each were able to write down a two to three paragraph explanation of his answers. He then told us he had randomly written down yes/no on a piece of paper. Our brains are wired to spot trends and make connections whether they exist or not.

Cro

[SenatorKevin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I frequenly find that at certain tables I may make 3 or 4 buy-ins, and I seem to hit my outs and draws repetitively at these tables. On the other hand there are tables at the same level and type where nothing I do can ever work: at these tables I lose my boats to better boats or quads, my 2-pairs are always beaten by straits, my opponant always has the nut flush, etc. I understand that some opponants are better than others, but still i have to wonder how the results can be so different and how it can be a random event that my cards always result in a second-best hand at certain tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

Psychologists have found out that humans can not accurately determine whether a series of events is random or not. Specifically, we are biased to see random patterns as non random. Personally, I think there is an evolutionary advantage in that - if we think we see a pattern where antelopes are at watering holes at dusk, and they are not thare - no big harm. But if we have such a theory about a nonrandom pattern and we are right - we get to eat an antelope and live long enough to have children.

There is an unfortunately bad book called Fooled by Randomness which discusses this bias in the context, mainly, of investments. My favorite example of this error is the "hot hand" in basketball. We all "know" that at times a player will get a "hot hand" such that he is more likely to make his next shot than he would normally be. But a careful statistical analysis shows that this is false. The probability of making the next shot is independent of whether you have made or missed a sequence of preceding shots. But damn it sure LOOKS like there is a "hot hand" effect. But there isn't. So too the cry - "it's rigged" It sure looks that way - but it isn't. You might look up Amos Tversky to find more stuff on this sort of thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but what about the tables where he loses to straits all the time?

<font color="white"> Lori </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he should raise preflop rather than get outflopped by someone playing 69o from the BB and hitting a straight.

[Crazy Porto]

don't we all know 100% random isn't artificially possible?