Random Number Generators (RNG)- Are they really that random?

[puzzlefish]

It makes no difference, because nobody ever present stats, that actually prove anything. People show, they are running below AIEV but never to an extend, which is completely unreasonable from a statistical point of view like the winrate of Potripper or Mike Postle, which were multible standard deviations from the mean. Or they claim, their AA was cracked 4 times in a row, which assuming 80% equity is supposed to happen every 138k hands. So obviously anyone playing a significant amount of poker will experience this not once but multible times, and it proves absolutely nothing.

So you're saying the only significant deviation from normal are extremes like Postle live or Potripper in the online scandal?

 

[dgroes]

I think you've got it right. We take our small samples and extrapolate our observations to imply that the poker demons are working against us.

what the real truth is we will never know anyway as outsider. we are simply forced to play optimal. which we dont naturally do anyway

 

[fundiver199]

So you're saying the only significant deviation from normal are extremes like Postle live or Potripper in the online scandal?

If a single player can show, he is running so bad, that the likelyhood of this is only 1:1000, that proves nothing, because way more than 1.000 people are playing on any given site. But if a large number of players can prove such a thing simultaneusly, it might. And if you took the entire player pool on a site and plugged their AIEV, the distribution of outcomes should follow a bell curve, and if it was significantly twisted with way to many outcomes in one or both tails, that would actually be proff of rigging.

 

[thedarkman]

for me pokerstars deffo feels like it's not rng sometimes

I've long had serious doubts about on-line poker but at times it has worked in my favour.

 

[samircyber9]

for me i'd rather focuse on decision making than all this of you lose you lose

 

[_soupypoopie_]

RNG

What do you peeps think about RNG ? Are they really that random when you can almost predict e.g. if some-one is holding an Ace you will see at least 1 hit the table , or 2 cards same suit, if the flop drops 2 cards of the same suit as theirs then the turn or river will bring the flush. I know it's not 100% of the time, but very close, imho.

A true random number generator is still an unsolved problem in computer science.
I learned that from The Big Bang Theory.
The solitiare game on my cell phone gives you the option of a "random deal" or a "winnable game"
So yes the program can be manipulated.
If they aren't juicing the game then they are stupid, I mean why wouldn't they rig the game to generate more rake?

 

[danoscar]

Depends on whose random generator. The poker we love to play online is not.

 

[pokerace_1]

he RNG is twisted in such a way in modern poker rooms that the maximum amount of rake is created, especially if you have made a conclusion on the eve.The last week, nimogu vygit on 888 with AA KL against average pairs, fish shove ollin on 100 bb without hesitation with 66 77 88

 

[sincos]

I have programmed my hand-generating program. Works exactly...

 

[YRAGAGARIN]

Maybe someone will find it funny, but sometimes I think it's twisted. This is especially noticeable when you play freerolls, a dude with a big bank always wins alyn no matter what hand you have

 

[budweiser74777]

I am sure - I even wrote several times - that the generator is one of the tools in the manipulations in the game

 

[Sschafell]

if I believe it's not random, I don't have to play!

 

[SopianaeExtra]

If they aren't juicing the game then they are stupid, I mean why wouldn't they rig the game to generate more rake?

Because then they would have to go to jail.

 

[research]

Because then they would have to go to jail.

To go to jail they would have to be caught, to be caught someone would have to analyse their software....SURPRISE... they don't let anyone access to their software.

 

[okeedokalee]

Do you really believe what you are saying. If so why are you still playing poker?

 

[blueskies]

Kind of a silly thing to say, when you have never even tried. Maybe you have played some cash games, I have no way of checking that. But according to your Sharkscope profile you have only played 11 normal buy-in games (all SnGs), since you started playing on ACR in 2018. Which is not exactly a large enough sample to draw any kind of conclusions what so ever

I know it's a common tactic here to put down anyone who doubts RNGs as liar, fish, loser, whatever. I am a winning player and I have played many many many hands on ACR and many many many hands on other websites. Don't make up stuff to try to attack me as a liar. I was the top cash and points winner in 2021 in Cardschat freerolls. You can verify it on my profile. I am not bringing it up to brag or anything, only to say that I am at least a decent player since you are implying I am lying about playing on ACR and I am a fish. On my sharkscope profile it clearly shows I have played hundreds of MTTs on ACR so I dunno why you need to say I never even tried when it's easily verifiable that you are the one lying.

I no longer play cash games on ACR because I believe their RNG is flawed. I play cash on BOL even though I don't get rakeback there. As for MTTs, I only play freeroll MTTs (most Cardschat freerolls). I primarily play cash games.

 

[SopianaeExtra]

To go to jail they would have to be caught, to be caught someone would have to analyse their software....SURPRISE... they don't let anyone access to their software.

Bullshit. Those certificates which are proudly presented by all major sites, issued by independent, impartial gambling agencies, don't grow on trees, y'know?

 

[Alexey Shley]

There are no RNG twists. Here, count how many times you got outs that you wanted, a person remembers only that he is being run over, and always blames the RNG for this. After all, there are moves in offline tournaments, and what is now to blame the dealer for twisting the deck?

 

[Backlash]

I played a lot of hands at one time. I can say that I have seen incredible situations on the table. I thought for a long time that it was twisted and this is specifically to take away my money. Then I became older and smarter and came to the conclusion that there is no deception. Anything can happen, and that's why it's random. To win MTT or wherever you need to have a special day of luck and add a little skill and tricks like bluffing.

<<<<-----This right here, hits the nail on the head!!!

 

[fundiver199]

On my Sharkscope profile it clearly shows I have played hundreds of MTTs on ACR so I dunno why you need to say I never even tried when it's easily verifiable that you are the one lying.

According to your profile here on CC, you are "siulaba888" on ACR, and according to Sharkscope "siulaba888" had only played 8 SnGs and a bunch of freerools on WNP, when I made my post. I have let my Sharkscope subscription expire, so I cant check your stats again, and there might be a few more regular games since. Of the last 8 games 7 were freerolls and 1 a 6,6$ MTT. But even so its pretty obvious, that the vast majority of your 827 games played were freerolls, since your average buyin is only 0,03$, but your average ROI is 10.831%.

 

[fundiver199]

According to your profile here on CC, you are "siulaba888" on ACR, and according to Sharkscope "siulaba888" had only played 8 SnGs and a bunch of freerools on WNP, when I made my post.

Sorry it was 11 SnGs, when I made my post in january, and not 8. Still the point remains the same. When you have only played such a small number of regular games, you have not even tried to beat them, so you can not say, if this is possible "playing proper poker". Having played more than 800 freerolls changes nothing, since per definition everyone are winning in freerolls.

 

[poxerator78]

If you play only in freerolls, then it is not correct to talk about RNG / because here the players do not risk anything and can easily go all-in with 7-2 or other bad cards and even beat AA. And you blame the RNG. for FAIL // you just need to raise your skill and play in tournaments for 5-10 bucks then you won’t go all-in with bad cards

 

[Chipmaster45]

Allow me to input my two cents....

RNG's are not "random" in any particular way, instead I prefer to think of them as "intentionally flawed". The site programmers (Pokerstars, GG Poker, Partypoker, etc.) all operate in this skewed manner...

They set the "generator" to draw in more inexperienced players, and using their skewed system, they "feed" them (hand them more winning hands than not). Doing so allows for more players, but it also screws over better, more seasoned (almost professional style) players.

This is the reason why statistically AA, KK, JJ, etc. gets routinely (as in 60-70% of the time) destroyed in tournaments. I have both witnessed this as a spectator, and as a participant, which just re-enforces the idea that the whole "that's just how poker works" excuse is just that; a weak excuse that no longer holds any merit with me.

I have personally played 1000's, if not 10000's of hands of poker in my 20+ years of playing, both IRL and online, and as such I refuse to believe otherwise.

 

[SopianaeExtra]

I must've played more than 10 thousand hands in the last month alone, therefore people should trust my judgement more: There's no rigging going on.

(obviously this is sarcasm, but just to point out how flawed this way of thinking is)

 

[fundiver199]

This is the reason why statistically AA, KK, JJ, etc. gets routinely (as in 60-70% of the time) destroyed in tournaments.

I assume, you have collected a large sample of hands in your tracker? So why not share the database with us and proof this claim, that big hands lose more often, than they should? Or could it be, that those numbers are just some, you pulled out of your ass and posted, because they look cool?