You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Table randomising
churchy18
Member Posts: 1,850
why everytime you get down too the last 2 tables is 1 always chip heavy..
versus...
happens all the time and does not seem fair when 1 table has 66%of chips in play.
| tiggertoo | 5760.63 |
| PASSASPLIF | 4928.72 |
| -PIMPIN- | 3005.01 |
| oldenglish | 2130.64 |
| IC_DEADPPL | 10453.50 |
| footsie66 | 10396.27 |
| churchy18 | 8374.03 |
| trevil25 | 6108.68 |
| onejohnb | 2842.52 |
Comments
Do you not think its a bit unfair that 2/3rds of the chips are on 1 table? when down too so few?
What's this fuss about true randomness?
Perhaps you have wondered how predictable machines like computers can generate randomness. In reality, most random numbers used in computer programs are pseudo-random, which means they are generated in a predictable fashion using a mathematical formula. This is fine for many purposes, but it may not be random in the way you expect if you're used to dice rolls and lottery drawings.
As for the fairness part when you are sat at a table five handed and 4 sat at your table have more than any1 else on the other 4 handed table does not seem that fair or random.
Honestly Churchy, shall we just put this down to your monthly mini breakdown where you question things about the site?
You will get, say 3 of the 4 biggest stacks on the table together about half of the time.
How big those big stacks are, and their relation to the other stacks is not a feature of the randomness.
P.S still going strong :@}
"Why does an ace always come when I've got KK?"
"Why does the river always complete a flush?"
"Why does Bates never lose an all in?"
It doesn't constantly happen, It's just your memory remembering the times it does.
Curiously enough the total stack sizes leans towards the more populated table.
As with all these theories, of course, we need to look for motive.
Why WOULD a regulated gaming site - more especially a large one, where poker is a small part of the whole - risk it's licence, name & integrity by messing with the natural order of things?
The conspiracy theorists, the "big stack always wins" guys, always say the same thing - poker sites want players to lose their money as quickly as possible, so they will then play another game.
In reality, of course, poker sites want the complete opposite. They want players to stay on the site as long as possible, & for players to be offered a good, fair, game, so they remain players for longer. Why would they not? The longer players survive, the more revenue they generate.