|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
SatanicBurrito New user 56 Posts |
Just curious who's playing online and where? I'm in JuicyStakes and Bovada (not sure I'll ever be able to withdraw from Juicy Stakes lol but only have my original $25 invested...)
|
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
Suckers play online. Mainly.
Clever players are endorsed by online websites for attracting suckers. Mainly. OK, OK, I know there are 17 people (hmmm, that many, really?) who made millions (well, supposed) playing online. But never forget the hundred millions who went just broke. |
|||||||||
silverking Inner circle 4574 Posts |
It took a few years of Arnold saying pretty much exactly what he said above, but I am (finally) in full agreement with him on this particular topic.
Although I frequented PokerStars pretty much daily some years ago, time has factually demonstrated that there's so much wrong with online poker, and so much water under the bridge in terms of the abuse both inside the companies and with player/player conspiracy, one would really have to be desperate for a game to wade into that cesspool today. So ... you were right all along Arnold |
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
@Silver,
I'm 100% convinced those online Poker site are just scams. And they cheat! Bad beats my ass! Bad luck my ass! Bots, invisible accounts, superusers, dedicated algorithms, backdoors, visible cards, cards control, you name it! No everything at the same time, not everywhere, not for all websites. But they cheat! Period. And when they don't cheat they just don't pay you the money you earned. I was debating with a French poker star a few days ago, and he maintains we are dreaming, exaggerating, telling fakes stories, blablabla. But truth is that I've been cheated many times in the past. Everest Poker, PokerStars, etc. In 2005 I made a study on low stakes tables. EVERY TIME my winning/cashing % was going over a certain limit, all of a sudden it became impossible to win, to have a pair as hole cards, etc. When the % was low enough, it was back to normal behavior (wins, losses, luck, bad beats, but in fair and expected percentages). I faced everything. No pocket pair for 300, 400 hands (yeah, very credible in terms of algorithms!), SAME opponents at every tourney I registered... The worst being those top pro "players" (bots), playing like gods at $1 tables, doing 0.001% mistakes, knowing perfectly the 7th card in Stud will give them the nuts... 2 Pair and so on. I had several hard drive crashes since 2005 and I can't unfortunately prove it today. I don't care if people don't believe me, I wouldn't say I'm "right" but I know what I'm talking about and what I have experienced. I've met players colluding using proxies, playing cousins (using simply... cell phones!), pfff, I could talk for hours. I admit some websites do their best and are probably as fair as they can, PokerStars for instance. But there's too much money involved for running such a business without black sheep. But some people would always say that we are idiots, that Poker websites don't have to cheat, they simply take their rake off. Yeah, no pocket pair for 400+ hands, sure, they play legit... |
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
Oh, I forgot. We lose online because we are bad players, we have a very poor bankroll management and so on.
That's what they say. What, Pitbull Poker? Absolute Poker? Ultimate Poker? Nah. We are just idiots, we just can't play Poker... |
|||||||||
splice Inner circle Canada 1246 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 22, 2014, AMcD wrote: Just curious, what advantage do you believe is gained and by whom for not giving you a pocket pair in 400 hands? |
|||||||||
silverking Inner circle 4574 Posts |
I began playing 5-10 Hold'em in small casinos that offered the game in the early to mid 80's (sit down - bricks'n'mortar, internet didn't exist yet).
Some 30 years of playing Hold'em face to face with other players - and a lot of hands played. I still communicate with many of the same folks who started playing at the same time as I did. One thing we ALL agree on today, is that after tens of thousands of live hands each, there are simply too many things you see playing online poker that experienced live poker players know just don't happen. In other words, experience at live play in a bricks'n'mortar venue, over decades - does not support play online poker as offering "randomly" dealt cards. In broad terms, the random number generator at the heart of online poker sites, is (for a variety of reasons) not always random. The random number generator can and is influenced by one or more outside forces, such that online play does not at all mirror live table play. Those outside forces being exerted on the random number generator include all of the suggestions in Arnold's post above: Superusers, exposed hands, multiple accounts, bots, etc. I'm not suggesting that it's an issue of the random number generator somehow failing to work as a standalone bit of software - but rather the random number generator has multiple holes in its armor which can (and does) cause it to no longer function in a random manner. The apparent alteration in random play I reference above doesn't happen all the time, and may in some games not happen at all - but any experienced poker player in 2014 will tell you they've seen it happen on multiple occasions. Even if a person played for only a couple of hours each day, and such interference happened only once every week or two - it's still often enough to radically alter game play such as to render it an utter waste of time. In a nutshell, the gut instinct of many experienced live poker players is that online poker will (at times) display structured dealing as opposed to random dealing. |
|||||||||
splice Inner circle Canada 1246 Posts |
Gut instincts, right. I'll leave you to it then.
|
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
@splice
I have myself coded gambling software for decades and for Poker in particular, I think I can talk a bit about that here. The first thing you want when coding for Poker is legitimate dealing. In short, you want the hands dealt "randomly". As genuine randomness is impossible with computers, you use mathematical algorithms. And you're looking for the best! No repetitive patterns, no recognizable sequences, etc. Both sides benefit out of it, the online website, because he can insure legitimate deals and have little fear a clever coder can break his dealing algorithm; the players because there is the guarantee that chances are equal among players. I know you're a Poker player and that you know the maths as well. But don't forget we have other readers. I'll be brief anyway. Let's take Texas Hold'Em in actual life: - you have 4C2 = 6 possibilities to get a pair out of 4 cards of same value. - there are 13 possible values (Ace to King), so 13x6 = 78 possible pairs - you have 52x51 = 1,326 pocket cards possibilities. Then I may get a pocket pair every 78/1,326 = 39/663 = 13/221 = 1/17 hands. I should, on average, see a pocket pair every 17 hands I'm dealt. Of course, that's the theory. Fluctuations are possible. You may wait 35 hands before seeing your first pocket pair of the night, or get 3 pocket pairs in a row. But, on average, and if you have played dozen of thousands of hands online you have controlled it, you'll see that, out of those dozen thousands hands, you'll be very close to the numbers the theory gives. If I face 400+ gaps between 2 pocket pairs, something is wrong! Once in a while? OK. 2 times in a row, why not? But EVERY TIME you get over a certain cashing %? NO WAY. No one will ever make me believe it's bad luck. Randomness has no pattern or thresholds. If I don't get my expected % of pocket pair, it means the dealing algorithm is crooked. If it's crooked for me, it surely is for someone else, but another way: I don't get my pairs, but others have! A pocket pair is quite a strong weapon to start a game. Sure, you can (fortunately!) win a round without a pocket pair with bluffing, correct betting, positional play, etc. But it's gonna be hard, in a long run, to defeat opponents when you never have a good starting hand. Opponents to the theory that online websites may be rigged say that there is no advantage for them to cheat you. They have their rake-off, blablabla. But IMHO, they get it wrong. What those websites want is your money, for sure, but they mainly don't want to lose their own money! No one will ever make me believe they don't have algorithms for detecting too "lucky" players, or players winning a bit too much according their expectations. With such players, not dealing them good starting hands is surely a good start to prevent them winning. Dealing their opponents better ones is even better. |
|||||||||
splice Inner circle Canada 1246 Posts |
It sure is unfortunate that you lost all the data you need to back up your claims. Then again, we have gut feelings and beliefs, that's good enough.
Over and out. |
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
Please, feel free to detail us the millions you made online .
|
|||||||||
silverking Inner circle 4574 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 22, 2014, splice wrote: splice, old friend - if I didn't know you better my feelings would be hurt by your blowing me off But seriously, I'm not sure what else a guy would have to go by but a gut instinct? Other than the now known to be factual instances of the inside Superuser cheating scandals, there is no way to actually know what was going on inside a server located somewhere in Costa Rica or Aruba. I have no problem suspecting (without proof) that the online sites may indeed manipulate hands such as to keep the tens or hundreds of thousands of small stakes players throwing their money into the pot to be raked. My own personal experience over my own many thousands of played hands lets me draw a conclusion like this with a fair amount of confidence. I've seen things playing online for as short as two hours that I've never seen in 31 years of playing live, face-to-face poker. I also have experienced too many times over the years (and even more recently) what are obviously multiple players at a table actually being only one guy sitting at his computer(s). Technology may have been immature enough even 3 or 4 years ago such that poker sites and their advanced detection algorithms might be able to catch players with multiple accounts, but today a technically inclined poker player would have no problem defeating such algorithms. It's actually far too easy, and even the 1-2 tables (which used to be immune to cheating, simply because it wasn't worth while when the bigger tables were ripe for the picking), even those 1-2 tables are now cesspools. But you're right splice, it's all gut instinct. As with all but the Superusers at your table who can see your cards - it's all an online player has to go by. In a nutshell, I've lost all confidence in online poker sites. It's really no more complex than that, and really not something I'm obliged to defend or justify. Endnote: when the actual game servers are on American, British, or Canadian soil, with complete oversight by the associated formal guburment gambling jurisdictions, I will most likely regain that lost confidence, but will probably be senile and utterly unable to read a hand by then ... although some of my local B&M players would tell you I already play like that. |
|||||||||
myrealsphinx New user Brazil 79 Posts |
A business... Is just a business. And the money rules!!!
|
|||||||||
Claudio Inner circle Europe 1927 Posts |
Edited.
|
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
Just a random pick up about, for instance, UltimateBet:
"Audio Tapes Expose Ultimate Bet Cheating Scandal Phil Hellmuth Responds" http://www.pokernews.com/news/2013/05/au......4986.htm "Travis Makar, Hamilton's former assistant, disclosed a three-hour audio tape of a 2008 meeting during which Hamilton admits to cheating and taking money from players.". "The men began the meeting by discussing the "God Mode" software designed to view opponents' hole cards during real-money games." So, here we have the OWNER of a big online Poker website of that time who was personally using super-accounts and cheating players himself! Not only the owner, but also top players endorsed by UltimateBet, like Annie Duke!!! And you still want to believe it's not happening with other websites? UB was a big website at that time, we're not talking about a small business, registered in a god forsaken country. How a business of such importance can cheat its customers like that? It tells a lot about how weak the regulations must be, how poorly effective the checking procedures (if any) are. Is it you, splice, who is gonna check that all software used by those companies are fair and legit? How could you do that? They guarantee their RNG algorithm, for instance, here, for PokerStars: http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/rng/ How do you know if they really use the one they declare? How do you know there is no backdoor? You know computers like me, I'm even sure you can code. It takes very little effort to leave hard to catch backdoor in complex code!! And history is full of backdoor in countless software. I'm sure you read the history of Absolute Poker scandal on 2+2 forum. Another "small" company... There's too much money in that business. Some lucky (or clever, if you want) players may have made money, there are guys making a living out of online Poker, I don't doubt about it. But there's a lot of cheating and weird behaviors involved too. And personally, when conditions are unfair from the outset, I leave . |
|||||||||
Claudio Inner circle Europe 1927 Posts |
Quote:
On Jul 22, 2014, AMcD wrote: I agree with AMcD, the probabilities of NOT getting a pair in 400 hands is way beyond the realm of genuine probabilities - as opposed to manipulated odds. To illustrate the point and for clarity's sake, let's imagine we have a biased coin which falls on Head with a probability 1/17 and Tail with 16/17 (where H means you get a pair and T no pair). At first glance 400 throws without Heads, i.e. 400 Tails in a row, may look possible: after all every throw is independent and the probability of Tail is very high, i.e. 16/17. Now when you ask what are the odds of getting 100 Tails in a row (i.e. no pairs over 100 deals), you get roughly 428 to 1. It looks quite reasonable. However when you answer the same question for 400 throws that would generate 400 Tails in a row, you get (16/17)^400 = 0.0000000000294052 . We're talking 34 billions to 1 NOT to get a pair in 400 deals! I make a living as a software developer and in my opinion all the arguments put forward by AMcD about software/coding/exploits etc... are cogent. |
|||||||||
splice Inner circle Canada 1246 Posts |
Nice numbers, Claudio, but if you want me to take you even half seriously, you'll have to analyze a statistically significant random sample of accurate, complete hand histories with a well formed hypothesis instead of relying on an anecdote of what someone feels they were dealt on an unnamed site 10 years ago. I've heard the same storied from a hundred different players on a hundred different live and online tables and they were likely just as accurate in their recall. If that's the kind of "evidence" you trust implicitly, you probably shouldn't be playing any kind of gambling game, ever, online or not.
|
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
Blablabla. The hate you have against me gets you blind about reality.
I played cards in brick and mortar places for decades. I've never seen a guy calling all bets just to get the last 6 falling on the River and getting the winning pair while there are Kings or Jacks on the board. I've had bad nights, rags for hours. But I can't remember a tourney without being dealt several pocket pairs during the night. It's years you say we are idiots, we have no evidence. Yet, my friend, more and more online Poker scandals pile up each year. I'm not a noob you know, I know my job! What do you think? You think I use free words like that? I have myself disassembled a few Poker bots or client side online Poker software (well, some parts only)! What do you expect? Me detailing everything publicly here in 2005? You have any idea about the problems I may have faced? When top companies admit they used special code to see opponents cards, what other kind of evidence do you need??? Ten years ago you'd have said, there is just 1 company that has been caught. 3 years later you'd say, 5. Now 25. When will you realize ? Yes, it was almost 10 years ago. So what? Reading the news every day since then, I'm not under the impression things have improved... It's years you refute 99% of what I say or write, but what about you? Have you made statistical analysis about the online cardroom you play? You have a fair idea about the randomness of their RNG algorithm? Tell me Splice, why are all those companies registered in places like here in Isle of Man or exotic places? |
|||||||||
AMcD Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts |
And please, for goodness sake, stop this year-lasting "statistically significant", "law of large numbers", etc. Quit the theory, just for once! If I screw you for 50 hands and lose it with 5,000 legitimate hands you'll see nothing. The numbers will satisfy your theory but yet, you will have been screwed! You're a clever math guy, you know perfectly it's easy to code an algorithm making you winning little while losing a lot, according your beloved theory! That's how suckers are trapped every day around actual tables.
Theory, pfff. It's 25 years I see players broke because the "theory" lol. Oh sorry, it's called bad luck. I don't mean online Poker is 100% crooked, but face the truth, there are weird things happening! |
|||||||||
silverking Inner circle 4574 Posts |
For clarity, I think it's important to strongly differentiate between assorted crazy gambling theories, and the entire discussion regarding the now well known vulnerabilities of online poker.
Of note regarding the willingness to use dishonesty as their tool of choice, one must note not only the Superuser cheating which took millions of dollars from online players, but also the incredibly bold dishonesty Absolute Poker and UltimateBet both exhibited once the chaps at 2plus2 caught their cheating and exposed it for the world to see. It took constant pressure from the 2plus2 folks before the online sites even acknowledged something might be wrong ... and then the sites claimed to have investigated and found nothing wrong! Absolue and Ultimate weren't (at the time) "small" poker sites. They were two of the biggest (if not the biggest) poker sites in the world. For a balanced view, anybody reading this thread with any interest owes it to themselves to read this 2plus2 thread with links to all their online cheating coverage, much of it from the original guys who did the initial research that caught the sites cheating, and eventually put them out of business. This is the best material available documenting the subject: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/162/be......-638056/ This stuff is hard fact, with no "gut" feeling involved. What one does with the information such as is linked above on 2plus2 is (IMO) completely a personal decision. It would (and does) seem disingenuous though to chide those who have, as a result of the information in these very 2plus2 forums, have fundamentally lost confidence in the integrity of online poker sites. Combine the information linked to above with things you may (or may not have) seen in your own online poker experiences and come to your own conclusions. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The Gambling Spot » » Who Plays Online Texas Hold'em? (1 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |