Not sure why everyone here is arguing - it is already well established that Sky Poker is rigged, just like the EuroMillions lottery draws, the Football pools, that job interview I went for last week and didn't get - oh, and life itself.
aleast new players agree with me random d@cks thinks it's not sorry about the swearing i would post some hands i had wen chip leader but cba 1 hand was aj vs 99 guest wat i hit 2 pair well then cya it's not rigged then.... Posted by imtoogoo26
Jesus Christ get a grip! It's **** poker! You were outdrawn in a freeroll, boohoo. Try bricking £800 worth of tournaments in 4 weeks, in prep for the biggest ever UKOPS festival. There are hundreds of hands I could post in here from recent weeks, but I grasp the concept of poker. You don't.
i made 1 mistake and football was on i wanted to lose 3rd place wasn't bad but still my fact is chip leader wins everytime wen all in. I even saw few hands on tv like a10 vs qj etc and qj would win..../3 10 the other day against AK,3 10 hit his straight
i made 1 mistake and football was on i wanted to lose 3rd place wasn't bad but still my fact is chip leader wins everytime wen all in. I even saw few hands on tv like a10 vs qj etc and qj would win..../3 10 the other day against AK,3 10 hit his straight Posted by imtoogoo26
have you ever considered the well known all in situation AK v QQ preflop because that man is a very common all in situation and I can tell you now the winners of that hand is a coin flip in itself, just put in pokerstove AK v QQ and you'll find out AK wins 43%( 46% if suited) and the QQ will win 53%
really it's not much different with AK v 10 3 AK-69% 10 3-30%
the 10 3 here is in the same spot as AK is in when it faces QQ, in other words it needs to hit a 10 or 3. the only added benefit for the AK is, unlike when the AK goes ahead versus QQ here if 10 3 went ahead OTF the AK has got a minimum of 6 cards that would put AK back infront again(providing 10 3 only got 1 pair OTF) whereas QQ only has 2 cards to go back infront when AK goes ahead.
I think the OP might be onto something here. I've gone back over some hand histories and I can see a pattern emerging. And interestingly it is only the chipleader that has it. Would be interested if some of you know it all regs could check your histories as well.
What I've discovered is that when short stacks lose a flip they often get knocked out of the tournament. But when the chipleader does he always stays in. Never can I see an occasion when he gets knocked out - not one - zippo.
I have 2 question for all the resident experts and particulerly the sky software promoters/protectors:
1. Is there any available evidence to prove that the sky software produces perfect representations of random poker expectations of probability in day to day or game to game running?
2. If so why does the 'agent' responsible for initial approval of software parameters go on to present a disclaimer with regard to not being responsible for any future misrepresentation of such?
This is a somewhat rhetorical post but I would actually be interested in comment from those players who swear by online poker software products regardless of the fact that many have little evidence to prove it. In addition to which I would be equally interested to know why an approving agent for licence acquisition needs a disclaimer within their narrow remit for approval of such.
“just put in poker stove AK v QQ and you’ll find……….
Fascinating information - However, if (as is being suggested) the software has a bias towards certain situations then these percentages have little meaning.
Comments
E'll agroo weth yii ef yii stip wreting "shet"
Doal?
imtoogoo
have you ever considered the well known all in situation AK v QQ preflop because that man is a very common all in situation and I can tell you now the winners of that hand is a coin flip in itself, just put in pokerstove AK v QQ and you'll find out AK wins 43%( 46% if suited) and the QQ will win 53%
really it's not much different with AK v 10 3 AK-69% 10 3-30%
the 10 3 here is in the same spot as AK is in when it faces QQ, in other words it needs to hit a 10 or 3. the only added benefit for the AK is, unlike when the AK goes ahead versus QQ here if 10 3 went ahead OTF the AK has got a minimum of 6 cards that would put AK back infront again(providing 10 3 only got 1 pair OTF) whereas QQ only has 2 cards to go back infront when AK goes ahead.
1. Is there any available evidence to prove that the sky software produces perfect representations of random poker expectations of probability in day to day or game to game running?
2. If so why does the 'agent' responsible for initial approval of software parameters go on to present a disclaimer with regard to not being responsible for any future misrepresentation of such?
This is a somewhat rhetorical post but I would actually be interested in comment from those players who swear by online poker software products regardless of the fact that many have little evidence to prove it. In addition to which I would be equally interested to know why an approving agent for licence acquisition needs a disclaimer within their narrow remit for approval of such.