After all, who believes that most poker sites are rigged?

[Suns of Beaches]

On paper that's just a part of the game. But what if this kind of runout only happened to you when you previously won on the same seat exactly one orbit around the table ago, or exactly three hands ago? Would it be rigged then?

Yes it would be rigged then but this scenario only exists in ur head.

Why would u even try to find patterns like this? I would invest my time in other things or just quit this game.

 

[puzzlefish]

Yes it would be rigged then but this scenario only exists in ur head.

Why would u even try to find patterns like this? I would invest my time in other things or just quit this game.

Why? Why not, if it's something that keeps happening over and over, then why not figure it out? It's either variance or it isn't. I get that it's much easier to just trust and not search. But it doesn't take a lot of work to group hands together based on some characteristics and then figure out what they have in common.

 

[Suns of Beaches]

Why? Why not, if it's something that keeps happening over and over, then why not figure it out? It's either variance or it isn't. I get that it's much easier to just trust and not search. But it doesn't take a lot of work to group hands together based on some characteristics and then figure out what they have in common.

There is nothing to figure out. And even when exactly this scenario happened to u over and over again, ur samplesize is still too small to prove anything.

Why not learn what hands u should be openimg from which position for example instead of wasting ur time on that stuff? Or are u just trolling?

 

[puzzlefish]

There is nothing to figure out. And even when exactly this scenario happened to u over and over again, ur samplesize is still too small to prove anything.

Why not learn what hands u should be openimg from which position for example instead of wasting ur time on that stuff? Or are u just trolling?

Why not do both? How do you know it is a waste of time when you don't have a large enough sample size either?

 

[acidburnfx]

I am a programmer. I know that it is a challenge to produce truly randomness. But yeah, today we can achieve impressive levels of randomness, not only by programming on itself, but also by using external sources of randomness together with the algorithms.

First of all, do we really know what is randomness? Do we really imagine? That's chaotic even to be defined! There are no rules, except that every possibility has to have the same chance to happen. Human beings have a lot of difficulty to imagine and thus, to reproduce these things.

Don't look just for that 1-out that somebody got in the river someday. We are dealing with a limited deck of cards. Considering Hold'em, if you know 2 cards of your hand and 4 on the board at the turn, there are 46 remaining unknown cards, and a chance of 1 in 46, despite unlikely at first, is not difficult to happen at all. In fact, the more you play, the more it will happen. It would be rigged if it never happened, actually.

52 cards is not that much. We don't come even close to the possibilities of chess, for example. There are some days in which I think everybody knows my cards: they know when I am bluffing, they 3-bet me several hands in a row, I lose many flips in a row, and I wonder if the problem is me.

Then I remember the nature of the game. My advice is this: try to learn more about the nature of the game.

In this sense, about the nature of the game that you mentioned and thinking more deeply, then we would be dishonest by nature because it is in our genetic code, as these algorithms now written by humans, would be created in an attempt to equalize (i.e. a kind of creation of a God) visualizing this in the long term, with the intention of improving our quality of life through technology in this new model of society or perhaps to punish the dishonest and why not, also the honest ones, since they are their rules, because you can change at any time and the power is in your hands?

 

[Captainine9]

Hello CC's members. I thank you all for sharing your thoughts, many good insights were posted in this thread.
One thing I would like to say to answer some of you is that I didn't start this discussion because of my winnings history, I play poker because I find it fascinating, more than as a way of income. I like to work with theory, reflect about things that I don't know much about and fundamentaly increase my repertory. I just want to share ideas and hear other people with similar insterests as mine.
The thing is that one of my biggest study subjects on poker is mindset building, I love psycology as much as I love probabilty. I don't tilt with bad beats, and I always faced variance as something awesome to theory on probability, the unexpected results when we are working with a speculating science that is entiraly about chance. I don't get mad because I'm winning or loosing, bad beats are just a concept originated by variance, which every poker player will face. Everything is an important part of my analysis on the game.
And yes, there is some big poker houses in São Paulo, where I live, and I've played a very big share of live poker, specially in this past year. Also, I grew up playing this game and many other card games with friends and family since I was a child, I was always amazed by this kind of game. Analysing, yes, I do believe it is different when we deal with the physical 52 cards deck and when the cards are dealt within the poker softwares, at least on MTT (I dont have much experience with real money cash games).
Again, my analysis are theoratical, I want to know more about it and I like to question things, specially when they envolve money, which is the element in our society that affects the most every system created in it. To me, everything is possible, and computer coding expands even more the possibilities. So I just wander, if you believe is a waste of time thinking about these possibilities, no problem, but I always had the impression that this is the perfect place to share and debate our ideas when it comes to anything related to poker, so, again, thank you for sharing.

 

[Luvepoker]

I don't believe the sites are rigged. My question would be why they would want to do that and risk going out of business.

We all know variance can get very bad and long but many people just don't seem to know it or they don't really understand it. During the worst point of a downturn this year I took a deeper look into my stats. We all know if you get into a coin flip situation with a PP vs 2 overs you will win just over 50% of the time. At one point in late February, I was only winning 20% of my coin flips as the favorite. There are people out there who would take that as proof the site is rigged but when you see the sample size of the hands it's so small. I am still only winning 32% of the hands this year but obviously that bad run ended but it will take time for variance to be taken out of the Margine of error to make it a fair evaluation. Many people just don't realize it can take millions of hands to take the variance out of the equation. I could go on and on with many examples just like this.

 

[odonob]

I would wonder how rigorously the sites are vetted and investigated to be honest. I imagine due to the variance in the game itself that it would be very difficult to prove impropriety on the side of poker companies. Also one does not hear of any fines imposed on said companies, so one wonders if they do get free rein. You also here of punters being offered less amounts than they win for accumulator bets.

 

[jmbluffnstuff]

Are seriously expecting people to just believe any random thing you say?.... you lost 57 allins in a row and 7 in a row 98 to 99% hands?????????????, please post the hand history, and don't say you don't have it cuz if that happened to me I'd have screenshots at the very least, 98 and 99% hands???, what does that even mean, please share with the rest of the class ..... I'm starting not to trust you anymore🤔

I would LOVE to copy and paste the hands from PS and post them here, but PS has removed the 'hands" feature so I cannot . It's completely blank and shows nothing.
I've requested HH's from them many times, and never get any reply, or anything sent to me.
I really don't care what you believe, I know what the facts are.

 

[jmbluffnstuff]

How is it possible to be a 75%-95% favourite 57 times in a row? Do you never run AK into a pocket pair or AX into a better AX in a late position confrontation? You must be running incredibly hot for this to never happen to you, because it happen all the time to the rest of us. Also how do you play on PokerStars, when according to your profile you live in North Carolina?

Yes back them games were very soft. Now they are not, and nobody have a dubble digit ROI in SnGs except over a small sample, when they have a sunrun.

I don't play real money on PS, you already know that from the post I made previously about the 57 hands, containing info on many of them.
I played thousands of games on FT Poker before black friday, and the reason I had a 14.9 ROI had nothing to do with soft games, it had to do with practice and study with the S&G wizard.
Sure, I had stretches of negative variance then, that's normal.
What is happening on PS now is absolutely not normal.
I am of the belief they use algorithms against people, the only way possible I could run that bad.

Yes, I do run AK into a pp and AJ/AQ into AK.....that's not what I'm taking about here. I'm talking about getting in mostly post flop or turn dominating 57x in a row and losing all 57.
And then a month later getting in 7x post flop crushing, and losing to runner-runner each time.
The site is an absolute joke.

 

[Captainine9]

I would like to add for some of you that is just hilarious how you think my game could be affected by tripping on these theories. I'm here to chat, and I like to learn things. Do you think I'm that low on pragmatism that I can't separate some game skills from a systematic curiosity?
Btw, realizing this patterns on each site has actually been helping at some spots.
For an example, those QQ x KK x JJ or AK x AK x KQ hands that we see so often, when I first started really studying the odds I knew that theoratically the probability of those hands happen is low, and it made perfect sense to understand more and to improve my game. But when I started to play much more online... well, we basically see those almost everyday, sometimes many times in a day. On practice, the numbers I've studied can be questioned many times. Chances that has less than 5% happening in weird ways, right after you are changed from your table, getting the first good hand in hours and loosing to quads... situations that acoording to the odds shouldn't happen so often, and I dont play a massive amount of tourneys, the frequency of those 5%, of all four of the same card blocking each other sometimes defies math itself. Now I play QQ, for instance, in many spots, totally different, not based on my knowledge about odds or table position, as I do it on live poker, but also understanding spots based on patterns, stack size and factual experience playing on big online fields, not theory.
Another thing some have said here, not to pay attention or wander about this kind of thing, and focus on my game... folks, one is different from the other, can't we think about more than one thing? lol Im not talking about anything related to technique or my study of poker, this forum is Poker rooms; I opened up a discussion about the softwares that we play on, and considerations about the system that we live in, which we all no has some unbelievable realities, specially when it comes to money.

 

[Poker Orifice]

I don't play real money on PS, you already know that from the post I made previously about the 57 hands, containing info on many of them.
I played thousands of games on FT Poker before black friday, and the reason I had a 14.9 ROI had nothing to do with soft games, it had to do with practice and study with the S&G wizard.
Sure, I had stretches of negative variance then, that's normal.
What is happening on PS now is absolutely not normal.
I am of the belief they use algorithms against people, the only way possible I could run that bad.

Yes, I do run AK into a pp and AJ/AQ into AK.....that's not what I'm taking about here. I'm talking about getting in mostly post flop or turn dominating 57x in a row and losing all 57.
And then a month later getting in 7x post flop crushing, and losing to runner-runner each time.
My entire post is an absolute joke.

I've fixed your post for you.

 

[MK_]

I would LOVE to copy and paste the hands from PS and post them here, but PS has removed the 'hands" feature so I cannot . It's completely blank and shows nothing.
I've requested HH's from them many times, and never get any reply, or anything sent to me.
I really don't care what you believe, I know what the facts are.

... I would LOVE to BELIEVE you but FACTS are provable, there is no such thing as a 98 or 99% hand in poker, math is a provable fact, you might want to research how high a hand can even be favored in poker before making such absurd claims, even if it was runner runner as you say it's still not 98 or 99%, never mind 7 times in a row, you might as well tell me you found a unicorn swimming in your pool 7 days in a row and that would be more believable, you don't need to blame ps for your lack of mythical hands to post, it was already more than obvious you wouldn't have any such hands to post because it's a mathematical impossibility but thanks for playing😏....

 

[Poker Orifice]

... I would LOVE to BELIEVE you but FACTS are provable, there is no such thing as a 98 or 99% hand in poker, math is a provable fact, you might want to research how high a hand can even be favored in poker before making such absurd claims, even if it was runner runner as you say it's still not 98 or 99%, never mind 7 times in a row, you might as well tell me you found a unicorn swimming in your pool 7 days in a row and that would be more believable, you don't need to blame ps for your lack of mythical hands to post, it was already more than obvious you wouldn't have any such hands to post because it's a mathematical impossibility but thanks for playing😏....

Well this just happened...

 

[Poker Orifice]

Do I need to show the result?

 

[MK_]

Do I need to show the result?

....yes you do and then get it in preflop as a 98 or 99% fave??? .....then do it 7 times in a row🥳👍

 

[MK_]

I would like to add for some of you that is just hilarious how you think my game could be affected by tripping on these theories. I'm here to chat, and I like to learn things. Do you think I'm that low on pragmatism that I can't separate some game skills from a systematic curiosity?
Btw, realizing this patterns on each site has actually been helping at some spots.
For an example, those QQ x KK x JJ or AK x AK x KQ hands that we see so often, when I first started really studying the odds I knew that theoratically the probability of those hands happen is low, and it made perfect sense to understand more and to improve my game. But when I started to play much more online... well, we basically see those almost everyday, sometimes many times in a day. On practice, the numbers I've studied can be questioned many times. Chances that has less than 5% happening in weird ways, right after you are changed from your table, getting the first good hand in hours and loosing to quads... situations that acoording to the odds shouldn't happen so often, and I dont play a massive amount of tourneys, the frequency of those 5%, of all four of the same card blocking each other sometimes defies math itself. Now I play QQ, for instance, in many spots, totally different, not based on my knowledge about odds or table position, as I do it on live poker, but also understanding spots based on patterns, stack size and factual experience playing on big online fields, not theory.
Another thing some have said here, not to pay attention or wander about this kind of thing, and focus on my game... folks, one is different from the other, can't we think about more than one thing? lol Im not talking about anything related to technique or my study of poker, this forum is Poker rooms; I opened up a discussion about the softwares that we play on, and considerations about the system that we live in, which we all no has some unbelievable realities, specially when it comes to money.

....you're absolutely correct it's a free forum, if you want to post about "unbelievable realities" enjoy👍...

 

[Poker Orifice]

....yes you do and then get it in preflop as a 98 or 99% fave??? .....then do it 7 times in a row🥳👍

this was my 18th hand in-a-row too!

 

[fundiver199]

View attachment 358832

Even though you did not lose, a hand like this surely feels like a bad beat anyway

 

[thedarkman]

I'm not an expert in programming, but I believe that everything can be manipulated, especially games

Here we go again. These sites are not rigged. The proof of that pudding is so many terrible players winning big consistently.

 

[dreamer13]

A botnet is a chain of bots that act together in the same gaming pool and exchange information. So, it is not just a network of bots, but also a type of collusion.Nowadays, players are especially concerned about new types of bots playing GTO.A superuser is an account whose owner is able to see the pocket cards of all other players in the poker room. It's almost impossible to beat him. Some may think that such accounts do not exist, but, unfortunately, there have been similar cases in the history of online poker, the most striking of them being the scandals with the Absolute Poker (2007) and Ultimate Bet (2008) rooms. In both cases, the room employee had access to hole card information and won a ton of money using that information at the tables.

 

[fundiver199]

I don't play real money on PS, you already know that from the post I made previously about the 57 hands, containing info on many of them.

So you are suggesting, that pokerstars has rigged its play money games? Ok then

 

[Andyreas]

So you are suggesting, that PokerStars has rigged its play money games? Ok then

But he's not suggesting; instead he provided clear proof that the play money games are rigged!!!111

They are probably too afraid to rig the real money games, so instead they did it to the play money ones. Makes much sense to me. 🤓

 

[Broz]

They are manipulated, yes.
For me, you can say what you want, but there are many absurd things that happen, especially for those of us who play at low limits, there are things that happen that not even mathematics can explain.

 

[Captainine9]

Sad how the internet is full of toxic cynicism.
To some of you:
It's impressive how naive is to blindly deny it just because you like the game, or win money with it, knowing the world we live in. The same way there's no proof for one side, there isn't for the other. So what makes you so full of yourself that you think you can mock other people for sharing their ideas without proof, if you don't have a clue either? Do you think I should stop thinking about these possibilities and start studying more poker? Well, maybe you should stop thinking about a game for a bit, and go study some history, geography, economics...

Maybe we should stop using the verb "rigged". Do you think that has absolutely no way that the coding of algorithms can't generate different results from the physical card game? Specially talking about companies that could change entire economies... that's why I've called you naive.
1. Probably there's no regulation at all about specifics on software egineering. 2. Apparently they can change their algorithm any time they want. 3. if anybody was able to really proof something, they are probably already so rich that they would never do it lol
Again, I'm here just to question the possibility, because the truth is that none of us really knows, so stop being so overbearing and start sharing your thoughts in a respectful way.