In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : I think he elaborated very well. Whilst we all know it is possible to hit a full house with 5-2, the hand described does seem miraculous, and is the type of hand that makes people feel uneasy. It is as though "the raiser has 5-2, so we can only deal 5's and 2's. Firstly , it was a poor shove with 5-2. Secondly , it was a miraculous flop to make a full house, But Thirdly, was it not overkill to deal another deuce on the turn, and then a 5 on the river to make quads? The raiser had 5-2 and was looking for 6 cards in a 40 card deck. 5 of them were dealt! You must agree that the odds of this happening are very low indeed. My own worst beat came when villain and I both had 30k chips in a tournament. I raised to 10k with QQ. Flop came 94Q. I shove 20k. How can he call with 3-5?? Turn 2 - River Ace. It was the circumstances of his call that were very doubtfull. Posted by JimRiddle7
Anyone else wishing they could get back the 16 seconds they wasted on this?
can I see this hand jim?? i'd also like to see somers too? Posted by jdsallstar
Hi, it would be very difficult for me to find it in my history Allstar, I wouldn't know where to start sifting through thousands of hands, and I did not save it. I can guarantee it is true though, I was very upset at the time.
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : Anyone else wishing they could get back the 16 seconds they wasted on this? Posted by hhyftrftdr
Lol, why cant you just admit that the odds of this happening are astronomical, and the circumstances in which it happens make people feel uneasy. Your short berating comments are of little use.
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : Hi, it would be very difficult for me to find it in my history Allstar, I wouldn't know where to start sifting through thousands of hands, and I did not save it. I can guarantee it is true though, I was very upset at the time. Posted by JimRiddle7
doesn't help your argument too much really but I know what you mean that it would be difficult to find.
I have another question for you though if the rng's of poker sites are dodgy why has there never been any concrete proof of discrepancy ever found? surely it wouldn't be too difficult with the right software.
2nd question - why would a poker site want to have a dodgy rng? what's in it for them? The collect the rake regardless and the game of poker itself creates enough action all by itself - reason its popular in the first place!
Sky recently dealt their 700 millionth hand. It would be remarkable and miraculous if something like this hadnt happened to someone. It is your ego and self-centeredness that makes it seem like it was orchestrated to happen to you. Maybe thats whete the feeling of unease comes from...
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : Lol, why cant you just admit that the odds of this happening are astronomical, and the circumstances in which it happens make people feel uneasy. Your short berating comments are of little use. Posted by JimRiddle7
The odds of flopping a full house on the flop with an unpaired hand is 1 in a 1000. he then has 3 outs for the turn or 6% roughly and then 4% to hit one of his remaining two outs. which works out if you multiply that out as 0.000002 or 1 in 500,000. Big odds yes but not impossible. when you consider Sky poker has not had over 700 millions hands then it should happen every so often.
Of course we haven't seen him post the hand yet so it's hard to know if it actually happened to him or not
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : doesn't help your argument too much really but I know what you mean that it would be difficult to find. I have another question for you though if the rng's of poker sites are dodgy why has there never been any concrete proof of discrepancy ever found? surely it wouldn't be too difficult with the right software. 2nd question - why would a poker site want to have a dodgy rng? what's in it for them? The collect the rake regardless and the game of poker itself creates enough action all by itself - reason its popular in the first place! Posted by jdsallstar
I appreciate all of your comments and as a low stakes player, I have been able to overcome the bad-beats and remain with a small profit.
Nobody can prove or dis-prove how the rng works, but I can recognise when a hand is miraculous.
With all of the hands that you guys have played, I would guess that you have seen a few yourselves.
Agreed that it is most likely random luck, but some.. like the one I described just seem unbelievable!
can I see this hand jim?? i'd also like to see somers too? Posted by jdsallstar
can I see this hand jim?? i'd also like to see somers too?
Why would you ask to see the hands? I assume we are all adults and not schoolchildren - there is no profit in my telling you a lie. I was under the impression the forum was for (in part) an exchange of views not childish games.
I lost to the hand described - you believing/disbelieving that fact is of no consequence to me whatsoever.
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : The odds of flopping a full house on the flop with an unpaired hand is 1 in a 1000. he then has 3 outs for the turn or 6% roughly and then 4% to hit one of his remaining two outs. which works out if you multiply that out as 0.000002 or 1 in 500,000. Big odds yes but not impossible. when you consider Sky poker has not had over 700 millions hands then it should happen every so often. Of course we haven't seen him post the hand yet so it's hard to know if it actually happened to him or not Posted by jdsallstar
Thanks for the calculation Allstar. 1 in 500,000, wow that is quite rare. He was very lucky.
Would have no idea how to do the calculation myself, lol.
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : c an I see this hand jim?? i'd also like to see somers too? Why would you ask to see the hands? I assume we are all adults and not schoolchildren - there is no profit in my telling you a lie. I was under the impression the forum was for (in part) an exchange of views not childish games. I lost to the hand described - you believing/disbelieving that fact is of no consequence to me whatsoever. Posted by somer
there is profit in you telling a lie - its what your using to back up your claim that the rng is fixed.
Is it really that childish of me to ask you to show the proof of what you're claiming happened?
Accuser: Judge this man stole my car Judge: is there any evidence of this? Accuser: I assume we are all adults and not schoolchildren - there is no profit in my telling you a lie Judge: good point. case closed lock him up!
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : there is profit in you telling a lie - its what your using to back up your claim that the rng is fixed. Is it really that childish of me to ask you to show the proof of what you're claiming happened? Accuser: Judge this man stole my car Judge: is there any evidence of this? Accuser: I assume we are all adults and not schoolchildren - there is no profit in my telling you a lie Judge: good point. case closed lock him up! Posted by jdsallstar
“there is profit in you telling a lie - its what your using to back up your claim that the rng is fixed”
If you read my post you will not find the word “Fixed” and yet you imply that it is my claim.
Sadly, one of the problems with posting on this forum is that some are unable to understand the comments.
They showed the EPT Monte Carlo on channel 4 the other night and there was a proper sick hand.
About 12 left in the tourney and it all goes in pre 99 v AQ v A5 so A5 has to make 2pr and AQ has to hit one of their 5 outs. Flop comes something like 925 so 9s have flopped a set and is about 99% favourite to win... Jason Mercier runs over to the feature table to tell other people they've got 2 bust outs.... turn 3, river 4 lol, so both Ax's chop.
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : “there is profit in you telling a lie - its what your using to back up your claim that the rng is fixed” If you read my post you will not find the word “Fixed” and yet you imply that it is my claim. Sadly, one of the problems with posting on this forum is that some are unable to understand the comments. Posted by somer
Some quotes from yourself regarding the rng from your posting history:
"the site is a straight as a corkscrew. no odds apply when its fixed." "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark....... " "Can these cards be truly described as random?" "Sadly, its just another example of the inability of the so called random number generator to produce random cards/hands.
The site experts will analyse the players actions advising on the play etc - whereas we should all be asking: WTF is going on with this sites RNG! " "If its “lady luck” then the poor woman is being overworked" "Rigged is a little strong"
So you may have not used the word "fixed" on this thread but you have used it in the past and implied it on many occasions. Whether you think the rng is fixed, bias, not random etc etc or whatever way you want to describe it is a little irrelevant - you have questioned it's reliability.
To try and defend the reliability of the rng i have posted:
-stats to show hands are far from impossible -asked questions that would support it's randomness, none of which has anyone attempted to answer I might add - i.e. what would sky get out of it? how do players make incredibly consistent profits? why has there never been any concrete proof of dodgy rngs? -gave live examples of equally horrendous beats
What have you done to back up your arguement that the software is not reliable?
Thats right - nothing, zero, zilch! The pantomine argument of "oh yes it is" doesnt really get you very far. You wont even post up the hand you describe in your post earlier.
In Response to Re: Bad hands winning on too regular a basis : there is profit in you telling a lie - its what your using to back up your claim that the rng is fixed. Is it really that childish of me to ask you to show the proof of what you're claiming happened? Accuser: Judge this man stole my car Judge: is there any evidence of this? Accuser: I assume we are all adults and not schoolchildren - there is no profit in my telling you a lie Judge: good point. case closed lock him up! Posted by jdsallstar
Lol...so who appointed you judge???
So if they show the hands will you say its fixed???
so whats the point???
I personally don't know why they would feel they have to
Comments
I have another question for you though if the rng's of poker sites are dodgy why has there never been any concrete proof of discrepancy ever found? surely it wouldn't be too difficult with the right software.
2nd question - why would a poker site want to have a dodgy rng? what's in it for them? The collect the rake regardless and the game of poker itself creates enough action all by itself - reason its popular in the first place!
Of course we haven't seen him post the hand yet so it's hard to know if it actually happened to him or not
Nobody can prove or dis-prove how the rng works, but I can recognise when a hand is miraculous.
With all of the hands that you guys have played, I would guess that you have seen a few yourselves.
Agreed that it is most likely random luck, but some.. like the one I described just seem unbelievable!
Kind regards everyone, Jim.
Would have no idea how to do the calculation myself, lol.
Is it really that childish of me to ask you to show the proof of what you're claiming happened?
Accuser: Judge this man stole my car
Judge: is there any evidence of this?
Accuser: I assume we are all adults and not schoolchildren - there is no profit in my telling you a lie
Judge: good point. case closed lock him up!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQDodik0ubw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMZrdFUX-Cs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xqaxWQO79g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua8J9NKcjr0
"the site is a straight as a corkscrew. no odds apply when its fixed."
"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark....... "
"Can these cards be truly described as random?"
"Sadly, its just another example of the inability of the so called random number generator to produce random cards/hands.
"If its “lady luck” then the poor woman is being overworked"
"Rigged is a little strong"
So you may have not used the word "fixed" on this thread but you have used it in the past and implied it on many occasions. Whether you think the rng is fixed, bias, not random etc etc or whatever way you want to describe it is a little irrelevant - you have questioned it's reliability.
To try and defend the reliability of the rng i have posted:
-stats to show hands are far from impossible
-asked questions that would support it's randomness, none of which has anyone attempted to answer I might add - i.e. what would sky get out of it? how do players make incredibly consistent profits? why has there never been any concrete proof of dodgy rngs?
-gave live examples of equally horrendous beats
What have you done to back up your arguement that the software is not reliable?
Thats right - nothing, zero, zilch! The pantomine argument of "oh yes it is" doesnt really get you very far. You wont even post up the hand you describe in your post earlier.