In Response to Re: WTF : quick question how does the software recognise who the good and bad players are to give these predetermined beats and wins? Posted by jdsallstar
Some people get a little carried away as to how the software might be juiced, like its a person specific entity that chooses its victims when the time or opportunity suits. However implausible that sounds its not impossible but very highly improbable and not the issue at hand. The issue is why does it appear to many players that the software performs outside of expected probability and how and why would that benefit the site. 1. Any positive increase in premium hand production would naturally force more action at the tables which would increase rake and further entries for rake away from cash tables. 2. Any positive increase in premium hand production would also lead to an increase in heads up clashes and all-in scenario's, again increasing rake and tournament entries. 3. Any inaccurate variance from expected probability of a positive nature will increase a whole range of scenario's on a repeated and regular basis; 1 and 2 outer river beats, runner runners, "as posted- A's v three suited club hands that all flopped a flush and A's came last of 4 all in", etc, this could easily include what might be called underdog protection but it will always mean that expected outcomes are skewed. 4. The agent responsible for testing skypoker software, so it could obtain a licence, states that the initial testing fell within allowable parameters- what does that mean? It performs within 5% of expected probability tolerance, 1%, 0.5%, 0.1%? Does it mean it falls within parameters with positive fluctuation, negative fluctuation or both? 5. The same agent, after testing software in a limited manner relevant to licence attainment, goes on to state a disclaimer that any future variance away from their findings and test results is not their responsibility and they accept no liability for such. What could that possibly mean.
The point is those engineering software can set it up in any way they choose to any directive given. They can set it up to influence all of the above and it makes absolute business sense to not invest heavily in the very best software if you are only a small time operator in a big market, small fish in a big poker pond is what SKY is. If sky lose players (which they do and have done) because they lose in regulation or through poor performance the site couldnt cope because they have little else to offer or fall back on, unlike the big players who dont have the same worries because they monopolise the market and therefore try to get the software as close to perfect as possible to attract all the best players. They do that by investing more money in the RNG product which only goes to prove standards of expectation are different.
I could go on but will end with a challenge for SKYPOKER; allow independent testing of your software performance historically and currently and if you do i'll do 'all' the spadework to get the people to do it who will take on the challenge without charge.
In Response to Re: WTF : WRONG !!! Poker room is like small eco system (fishes/sharks thing), Poker rooms dont want money to leave this eco system, so the best way of doing it - make sure that money keep flowing between players (pay pay pay your rake). In other words they don't like if you win too much, because that means, that you will start cashing out . Second thing - if bad player is loosing all the time, he's not gona play and not make any deposits(why, if he can't win ?). So poker rooms try to keep balance - helping bad players to win some money, which they can loose later on a same room . Money flow from player to player makes sure that players will not stop playing and paying rake. Of course if you good and have a good BM - you can still be up after all those bad beats Posted by xcv
So on a six-max cash table, you have:
1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case. 2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time. 3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster. 4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called. 5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable. 6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table.
So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory?
Luckily for poker rooms the skill factor of poker naturally rewards the good players, and the inherent variance naturally allows players of all ability to win sometimes. So no input required. Innit. Cheers, TEDDY Posted by TeddyBloat
That simply isnt true? Online poker rooms are not the same as 'poker rooms' with decks of cards and dealers. Neither are they the same as each other. Before skill, experience or any other factor is employed by the consumer the quality of the product is questionable. For example the RNG product at P-stars is far superior to the product here and it is still imperfect to whatever small degree because the challenge of computer based RNG technology is not a walk in the park.
Beyond that everything is relative and you should be right up to a point but whilst not the best player in the world this is the only site I cannot make a profit or hold my own on and that to me doesnt add up and especially so when i can do it on P-stars when high rolling MTT'S against the best players around as well as on the best RNG product available. Just cant take the hours anymore or I wouldnt have come back to this hole in the first place.
In Response to Re: WTF : So on a six-max cash table, you have: 1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case. 2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time. 3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster. 4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called. 5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable. 6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table. So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory? I guess that makes you Dopey, right? Posted by Slipwater
Slipwater, you should rail against the issues not the players that complain. Your analogy is funny and at times will be spot on but it says nothing about 'the SKY product'. You cant prove it performs accurately can you? You cant prove the frustrations of a lot of people dont add up to something of concern can you?
I first started here because 25 years ago i began playing local casinos with a friend who'd joined sky. I would describe him as a semi-pro (family man but earned around 2-3k a month, also won the main event here and generally a strong player) and he stopped playing a few years ago claiming something had changed in the software. He's not the kind of person to beef about his losses but would, like you, talk up or down the standard of players. For him to state that and leave the site has more credibility to me than anything said about how it might be affected by personal standards of play.
In Response to Re: WTF : So on a six-max cash table, you have: 1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case. 2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time. 3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster. 4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called. 5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable. 6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table. So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory? I guess that makes you Dopey, right? Posted by Slipwater
In Response to Re: WTF : So on a six-max cash table, you have: 1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case. 2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time. 3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster. 4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called. 5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable. 6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table. So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory? I guess that makes you Dopey, right? Posted by Slipwater
Excellent !
My guess would be that they're all good at short stacked poker.
In Response to Re: WTF : So on a six-max cash table, you have: 1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case. 2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time. 3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster. 4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called. 5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable. 6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table. So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory? I guess that makes you Dopey, right? Posted by Slipwater
First Idea that came to my head. Can it be based on total perfomance ? For example if you lose 35 or 53 hands in a row ( in any game) so you will definitely going to win next hand no matter what cards you have. I just believe that companies behind poker rooms need to protect there business (and money) so they have enough power to do it .... same like casinos in real life - if you win too much they might ask you to leave
xcv, lambert tells me he loves to play u HU, the games r always close and more interesting than other players apparently, do you enjoy them as much as he does?
xcv, lambert tells me he loves to play u HU, the games r always close and more interesting than other players apparently, do you enjoy them as much as he does? Posted by DOHHHHHHH
In Response to Re: WTF : WRONG !!! Poker room is like small eco system (fishes/sharks thing), Poker rooms dont want money to leave this eco system, so the best way of doing it - make sure that money keep flowing between players (pay pay pay your rake). In other words they don't like if you win too much, because that means, that you will start cashing out . Second thing - if bad player is loosing all the time, he's not gona play and not make any deposits(why, if he can't win ?). So poker rooms try to keep balance - helping bad players to win some money, which they can loose later on a same room . Money flow from player to player makes sure that players will not stop playing and paying rake. Of course if you good and have a good BM - you can still be up after all those bad beats Posted by xcv
You may be onto something here I read somewhere we are all just playing with borrowed money of someone called Mr Ivey.
BAD BEATS SET UPS RUNNER RUNNER NOW I KNOW ABOUT VARIANCE IVE BEEN PLAYING 8 YRS AN BEEN PLAYING ON SKY SINCE THE START BUT THIS IS GETTING STUPID THE PROBARBILTY FACTORS ON SOME OF THESE ARE CRAZY YET IVE SEEN SOME CRAZY STUFF NOT ONLY MY HANDS OTHER PLAYERS YES IVE BEEN ON THE WINNING SIDE AS WELL AS THE LOSING SIDE (MOSTLY) AND HAVE BEEN THROUGH MANY BAD SPELLS BUT IVE NEVER SEEN THIS CONSISTANCY ON SKY WHERE THE MONEY IN INEVITABLY GOING IN THERE SOMEHOW ,ONLY TO SEE SOMETHING CRAZY ...................PARANOIA IS SETTING IN BIG TIME ..........CONSPIRICY THEORYS AND ALL THAT .............UDIRTYRAT Posted by UDirtyRAT
i have lost 8 all in shoves with qq against a x plus 4 kk against a x on the trot the odds on this site for the last few weeks have been backwards as the all ins with other players have been working out the same this is most definetly not VARIANCE
I overheard a couple of people talking the other day... It turns out if you flip a coin 10 times, it won't always come up 5 heads and 5 tails WTFFFFF!!!!!!!!!! #rigged Posted by Lambert180
Comments
1. Any positive increase in premium hand production would naturally force more action at the tables which would increase rake and further entries for rake away from cash tables.
2. Any positive increase in premium hand production would also lead to an increase in heads up clashes and all-in scenario's, again increasing rake and tournament entries.
3. Any inaccurate variance from expected probability of a positive nature will increase a whole range of scenario's on a repeated and regular basis; 1 and 2 outer river beats, runner runners, "as posted- A's v three suited club hands that all flopped a flush and A's came last of 4 all in", etc, this could easily include what might be called underdog protection but it will always mean that expected outcomes are skewed.
4. The agent responsible for testing skypoker software, so it could obtain a licence, states that the initial testing fell within allowable parameters- what does that mean? It performs within 5% of expected probability tolerance, 1%, 0.5%, 0.1%? Does it mean it falls within parameters with positive fluctuation, negative fluctuation or both?
5. The same agent, after testing software in a limited manner relevant to licence attainment, goes on to state a disclaimer that any future variance away from their findings and test results is not their responsibility and they accept no liability for such. What could that possibly mean.
The point is those engineering software can set it up in any way they choose to any directive given. They can set it up to influence all of the above and it makes absolute business sense to not invest heavily in the very best software if you are only a small time operator in a big market, small fish in a big poker pond is what SKY is. If sky lose players (which they do and have done) because they lose in regulation or through poor performance the site couldnt cope because they have little else to offer or fall back on, unlike the big players who dont have the same worries because they monopolise the market and therefore try to get the software as close to perfect as possible to attract all the best players. They do that by investing more money in the RNG product which only goes to prove standards of expectation are different.
I could go on but will end with a challenge for SKYPOKER; allow independent testing of your software performance historically and currently and if you do i'll do 'all' the spadework to get the people to do it who will take on the challenge without charge.
1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case.
2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time.
3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster.
4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called.
5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable.
6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table.
So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory?
I guess that makes you Dopey, right?
Online poker rooms are not the same as 'poker rooms' with decks of cards and dealers. Neither are they the same as each other. Before skill, experience or any other factor is employed by the consumer the quality of the product is questionable. For example the RNG product at P-stars is far superior to the product here and it is still imperfect to whatever small degree because the challenge of computer based RNG technology is not a walk in the park.
Beyond that everything is relative and you should be right up to a point but whilst not the best player in the world this is the only site I cannot make a profit or hold my own on and that to me doesnt add up and especially so when i can do it on P-stars when high rolling MTT'S against the best players around as well as on the best RNG product available. Just cant take the hours anymore or I wouldnt have come back to this hole in the first place.
I first started here because 25 years ago i began playing local casinos with a friend who'd joined sky. I would describe him as a semi-pro (family man but earned around 2-3k a month, also won the main event here and generally a strong player) and he stopped playing a few years ago claiming something had changed in the software. He's not the kind of person to beef about his losses but would, like you, talk up or down the standard of players. For him to state that and leave the site has more credibility to me than anything said about how it might be affected by personal standards of play.
My guess would be that they're all good at short stacked poker.
Nevermind if you don't wanna answer.
Soz for attempting to derail the thread.
It turns out if you flip a coin 10 times, it won't always come up 5 heads and 5 tails
WTFFFFF!!!!!!!!!!
#rigged