[hachkc]

Originally Posted by d_p

I tend to agree with you about avoiding it at lower levels. But then I also wonder if lower levels would be the better place to do that. Simply because the "less experienced" players down (like me) at the lower tables would not be as quick to pick up on it as the more seasoned folk are.

I'm working on the assumption:

If you are going to cheat, go for the gold not the bronze. The penalty is the same either way but the prize is bigger.

[ilyu2]

Originally Posted by d_p

*gasp*

Please, oh please tell me you didn't kick your dog!

Kick my dog NEVER EVER!!!! I just kicked Dimperdoo

[dad604]

Online poker is rigged!!! Not.

[w16227]

Originally Posted by 99%evil

I don't believe that there are an "true" random number generators. So the cards are not actually random. I think I saw a show on the History channel that talked about how slot machines are not really random, a computer cannot spit out a random number, it has to be programmed to supposedly produce random numbers, but it cannot produce arbitrary numbers. There is a method behind the randomness, which of course means it's not random.


it almost seems that garbage gets rewarded more often than not a PS. I'm done with cash there, I'm onto my free money at RoyalVegas or whatever that site is called. I'll stick to live action fr cash.

Two points to comment on - the easy one first. Garbage gets rewarded more because garbage is played more. Deal out 10 straight 10 player holdem hands. Deal them all the way to the river. Look at what actually wins. Many times it is junk. In a decent home game - you may have 1-2 callers with trash. Online - especially at lower limits, you get 2-4+. The action is also a lot quicker - so your selective memory has more chances to kick in.

As for randomness - the slot machines did not have a "seed" that was random. It is easy to have a true random number generated through a computer. It all depends on the seed. The seed is the number used to run the random number generator (RNG). It starts the calculation. The same exact seed input would produce the same exact shuffle or slot roll.

There was a big story a while back regarding planetpoker. In an effort to show how random and fair their deal was - they posted their actual deal algorithm. Oops. A computer team cracked their system. They figured out that the seed was derived from the time clock on the main server. They also found a bug - approximately 30% (I believe) of the possible hands were eliminated through a calculation error.

They were able to set up a program where after entering 5-10 dealt hands, they could predict the entire deal from then on.

Needless to say - sites do not publish their calculations anymore. They also do not use a fixed or easily reproducible seed file. The slot machines need an internal seed - or be somehow wired into a central server. I would bet that they are still in internally seeded.

Pokerstars uses a number generated by users mouse position. Given a large enough sample - this "seed" is sufficiently random in itself to feed the RNG and produce a random distribution of cards. It is also nearly hack proof (how do you reproduce that?).

So you are correct - a computer program itself is never truly random - but if the input data can be considered random - then the output will be as well.

[yeltzen]

Hahahahah I <3 bad beats!!!

[SpeakEasy]

Originally Posted by PawNtheSandman

Flop is



first guy checks.
Next guy raises to 100

I go over and bet 250
First guy folds.
Second guy calls

Instead of crying about on-line poker with the others, I'll give some constructive criticism.

Ask yourself: What was the purpose of your flop raise? Build the pot or win the hand?

You don't explain what the blinds were, but you should have raised more on the flop. (And, you were the first raise. Villain's opening action on the flop was a bet, not a raise.) You're raise was a little teaser, enticing a call. Assuming the pot was 150 going to the flop (which you do not tell us), he only had to call 150 for a 500 pot -- a bit less than 3 to 1 pot odds. What hand wouldn't call that raise? He might have put you on a draw and thought he was ahead with a pair -- a very reasonable assumption with your raise.

On the turn, if he put you on a draw, then of course he's going to put his money in with a set. The pot is 2450 (again assuming a 150 pot going to the flop), and he only has to call 800, so again he's getting about 3 to 1 on his money. Your raise plus his turn bet priced him in.

Would it surprise you to learn that he actually had about a 22% chance of winning after he turn? He had ten outs -- three queens, three jacks, three tens and the last six. The case 6 looked brutal and quads fits the "on-line poker is rigged" story nicely, but any of nine other cards would have brought the same fate. It the river was a ten, would everyone still be crying that on-line poker is rigged?

All in all, not that impressive of a bad-beat story, and you could have prevented it with a better flop raise. Win a smallish pot rather than expose yourself to losing a big pot -- this is a much better way to survive in a tournament. Learn from your mistakes.


As for this "on-line poker is rigged" crap, two thoughts:

1. If on-line poker is rigged, then someone rigged it in my favor and didn't tell me when I signed up. I had to figure it out on my own. Get it? If not, I can explain further.

2. Its EXACTLY the same live.

[phatlad]

Hand 44 - Daniel Bergsdorf has the button in seat 5, Lazar raises to $240,000, Alsancak reraises all in, and Lazar calls. Alsancak shows pocket queens (Qs-Qd), while Lazar has Ah-Jh. As the shorter stack, Alsancak faces potential elimination on this hand. The flop comes Ad-7c-4s, and Lazar takes the lead with a pair of aces. Alsancak needs to catch a queen (two outs) to stay alive. The turn card pairs the board with the 7h, and Alsancak is down to his last chance to make the TV Final Table in the 2005 World Series of Poker.

The river card is -- the QUEEN of hearts!

The crowd goes wild in surprise and applause, as Lazar just sits there, stunned. The media and the ESPN crew seem noticeably disappointed, hoping to get out of here before 6:00 am.

Jack Effel hears a comment from the sidelines, and repeats it on the microphone, to big laughs from the crowd: "Just like on the Internet."

[yeltzen]

Lots of people lose their ass on the internet and get a few horrible beats along the way.
I'm one of them, but I would never say online poker is rigged. If you suck at poker, you will lose online just like you lose live. If you are good at poker, you will win online just like you win live. I know it's easier to rationalize it with something like, "online poker is rigged but only against people who post on message boards... the people that suck out on me NEVER GET A BAD BEAT EVER," but be a man like me and just admit that you suck if you're a losing player overall.

k thx

[PawNtheSandman]

You would call with 6's? after a flop of 3 cards that beat your pair?

I wasn't outplayed, some guy with no clue how to play got lucky.

[Timmay]

There just happen to be a lot more people out there on the internet that like to "gamble" as opposed to a B&M place. At least that is my experience.

To them, throwing the money down in each betting round is no different than throwing their money into a slot machine or betting every hand of BJ...they are just waiting to "hit".