Its not unusual for someone to be a total non believer... even when the evidence via maths is there.... theres a statement all sites use ('we would not financially benefit from having such a deck as we only make profit from fees and rake'), that you can see is totally untrue for yourself ....The Gambling Commision put their logo on sites implying that they regulate poker closely, giving you false piece of mind, where in fact they are not involved whatsoever..... and poker sites are just a business, ones that will have board meetings on how they can maximise profit the same as any other.
If you think that when there is a glaring opportunity to maximise profit by having a small algorithm that retains custom and increase rake, would you be prepared to accept this would at least be considered in an industry that ALL the other games operate that way? Unless you think slots, bingo, blacjack are completely random? We all accept there is a percentage win rate in these games and that rate is controlled by sites.
As The Gambling Commision regulate online poker alongside these games that are confirmed as controlled, why would this be the only one that isnt? If you ever speak with them, they think poker is a game of total luck and there is no-one there who knows the difference between poker and slots. All this is fact, ring them for yourself!
So if you think the old saying of why would poker sites risk their licence if found out, the answer is absolutely no-one is even beginning to look, so there is no risk whatsoever in its present state. If there ever was an announcement of proper regulation, which would take months, the algorithm could be removed overnight. There is zero risk.
Sites are basically regulated by the external auditors (The Gambling Commsion will tell you this openly, that they have no involvement other then issuing certificates, which are totally issued on the findings of the external 3rd party auditor), who sites are paying huge amounts of money to audit their decks... if they outed one, they would have to out them all... which would finish the external audit business.... can you see a problem of conflict of interest there at all?
I think any non believer would have at least have to acknowledge that 'regulation' is at the very least, in such a state that it is open to any given site to do what many of us can plainly see.
This isnt a conspiracy theory, you just have to think that sites are businesses trying to make as much money as possible, whilst operating and pushing the boundaries of regulation, as in all fields of business. You know every business looks for legal loopholes, etc, i really dont understand why you would think this would be any different, especially when as far as The Gmabling Commission' are concerned, they are doing nothing wrong.
I think when you see the word 'regulated', many poker players think theres a poker expert team at The Gambling Commision, checking decks and outcomes. It just means sites are operating as finacially sound, secure and nothing more.
Still better odds than Spurs ever winning the league...
No, I checked, Spurs are 744,282,853,678,701,455,922,507,579,277,316,643,178,128,753,343,813,693,728,245,963,960,974,631,028,119,473,486,019,635,930,893,891,134,220,822,124,816,566,203,939,432,067,701,407,743 / 1, so a slighty better bet.
I'm quite confused by this thread. Generally people that berate other players in the chat box are copmplaining because the player is "playing bad" and they don't approve of that. It's obviously totally idiotic to tell players they are playing badly, even if they are, as not only might it encourage them to educate themselves to play better or to simply leave, but also it's pretty rude.
A roulette wheel makes its rake based on the rules, not on its randomness. As soon as a wheel is shown to have flaws such that it is non-random, it can be exploited by the punters.
If you’ve discovered that small stacks win close to 100% of the time on a particular site, you could not lose. Enjoy it whilst it lasts.
This is an extraordinarily strong case of confirmation bias, all the way up to 458. Waddy's feet are firmly planted, and there he will remain. I've seen this so many times over the years. Any sort of logical coercion only digs them in deeper.
I guess my question is why don't you just do whjat he does and turn yourself into a big winner instead of moaning about it?
Waddy believes that OP is in fact playing very badly, but is only winning because the deck is rigged in his favour.
I know but I think Waddy has been trying to say that this £10bn multinational corporation have paid a team of developers to rig the site in favour of Shippy BECAUSE he is very aggressive preflop and bets any flop sometimes with hi-only hands. Surely if he makes himself like Shippy then he'll get the same benefit, unless he believes that Shippy is being favoured by the site for some other reason...(he never moans and isn't rude in the chat box?)
Not true and a blatant attempt to belittle my findings, quite short sighted and wholly typical of anyone involved in a site. I try to give u fact and back it up. This however, is a rather childish made up post of what i might, but doubtfully think. Who would you rather believe!?
Clearly, im saying the deck has an algorithm purely to prevent particulary bad plays from losing at the rate maths dictates. These players will still be losers from other all round poor play, but not so much that they cant maintain playing. This maintains site player numbers, which is critical for a site with only 700 players online. Its spreading out the wins a little by recognising those calls that are simply inexplicable, whilst also creating max rake at the same time in cash games.
I of course cant, unlike your suggestion 'do what he does and become a big winner', because all it is doing is preventing you from losing too much. You cant make a profit by playing extreme poor poker, but you certainly will not lose to the tune of what is anything like in line with maths.
So Neil, i appreciate as an ambassador for a site, its your job to defend them, but try to do a little better than this frankly childish post!
"3 With it being an online deck, you are hitting like K5 on the turn and river once reraising and ending up all in on the flop, at a fantastic rate compared to a real deck".
Remind us of the difference between an "online deck" & a "real deck" please.
I will. There is an episode of a Poker show where Mike Matasow, Jennifer Harman, Chris Ferguson and other high profile professionals, who were all affiliated to online sites at that time are at a table. The board is scary and all of them have top hands.
After the hand finishes, one says 'wow that was an internet hand' ... all of them have played hundreds of thousands of hands live and were wowed about this one hand, which on any given hour on any given day, you will encounter online.
If you could answer what you think the players meant by 'an internet hand', as your comment above suggests there is no difference?
I guess my question is why don't you just do whjat he does and turn yourself into a big winner instead of moaning about it?
Waddy believes that OP is in fact playing very badly, but is only winning because the deck is rigged in his favour.
I know but I think Waddy has been trying to say that this £10bn multinational corporation have paid a team of developers to rig the site in favour of Shippy BECAUSE he is very aggressive preflop and bets any flop sometimes with hi-only hands. Surely if he makes himself like Shippy then he'll get the same benefit, unless he believes that Shippy is being favoured by the site for some other reason...(he never moans and isn't rude in the chat box?)
Not true and a blatant attempt to belittle my findings, quite short sighted and wholly typical of anyone involved in a site. I try to give u fact and back it up. This however, is a rather childish made up post of what i might, but doubtfully think. Who would you rather believe!?
Clearly, im saying the deck has an algorithm purely to prevent particulary bad plays from losing at the rate maths dictates. These players will still be losers from other all round poor play, but not so much that they cant maintain playing. This maintains site player numbers, which is critical for a site with only 700 players online. Its spreading out the wins a little by recognising those calls that are simply inexplicable, whilst also creating max rake at the same time in cash games.
I of course cant, unlike your suggestion 'do what he does and become a big winner', because all it is doing is preventing you from losing too much. You cant make a profit by playing extreme poor poker, but you certainly will not lose to the tune of what is anything like in line with maths.
So Neil, i appreciate as an ambassador for a site, its your job to defend them, but try to do a little better than this frankly childish post!
Shippy is winning. You identified why that is. Why don't you copy him and become a winner like him? Nothing childish in that, it's a simple enough question.
try spinning a coin and see how far you get before a heads beats a tail or vice versa, i think u may get to 10 at best, if you get to 458 i think any mathmatician would say thats impossible.
I think in fact any mathematician would say the direct opposite.
I guess my question is why don't you just do whjat he does and turn yourself into a big winner instead of moaning about it?
Waddy believes that OP is in fact playing very badly, but is only winning because the deck is rigged in his favour.
I know but I think Waddy has been trying to say that this £10bn multinational corporation have paid a team of developers to rig the site in favour of Shippy BECAUSE he is very aggressive preflop and bets any flop sometimes with hi-only hands. Surely if he makes himself like Shippy then he'll get the same benefit, unless he believes that Shippy is being favoured by the site for some other reason...(he never moans and isn't rude in the chat box?)
Not true and a blatant attempt to belittle my findings, quite short sighted and wholly typical of anyone involved in a site. I try to give u fact and back it up. This however, is a rather childish made up post of what i might, but doubtfully think. Who would you rather believe!?
Clearly, im saying the deck has an algorithm purely to prevent particulary bad plays from losing at the rate maths dictates. These players will still be losers from other all round poor play, but not so much that they cant maintain playing. This maintains site player numbers, which is critical for a site with only 700 players online. Its spreading out the wins a little by recognising those calls that are simply inexplicable, whilst also creating max rake at the same time in cash games.
I of course cant, unlike your suggestion 'do what he does and become a big winner', because all it is doing is preventing you from losing too much. You cant make a profit by playing extreme poor poker, but you certainly will not lose to the tune of what is anything like in line with maths.
So Neil, i appreciate as an ambassador for a site, its your job to defend them, but try to do a little better than this frankly childish post!
Shippy is winning. You identified why that is. Why don't you copy him and become a winner like him? Nothing childish in that, it's a simple enough question.
I would suggest that 'waddy thinks a multi million corporation has decided to pay a team of developers to rig the deck in favour of shippy' to be slightly speculative and yes a little childish. I would keep any comments to ones that try and keep to the truth and factual
try spinning a coin and see how far you get before a heads beats a tail or vice versa, i think u may get to 10 at best, if you get to 458 i think any mathmatician would say thats impossible.
I think in fact any mathematician would say the direct opposite.
Other players have put a table up of the chance of that happening at 0.0000000000000%.... does this mathematician u mention have an abacus he cud use!?
If you left 888 straight after this run it should be very easy to find your last hand histories and share them here. You can send a link to the HH file via pm so that people can see the facts.
I can waste my time doing 458, but would it change anyones mind? I will do some, see how we get on. Remember, it is the all in preflop after a big giveaway hand... u can see the big pot in the few hands previous, or directly before... its the first time there is an all in preflop after that big hand.
not only do they double up auto, its always 3 of a kind or better.....
You are doing the same thing every anti vaccine, riggie, conspiracy person does. You are taking selective pieces of evidence and presenting them as some sort of proof in your case but in reality it's just a straw man.
I haven't played on 888 in some time, but last I knew you could just download all the HH as one or a few files and then view them in a tracker, or even just as text.
Obviously you would have to be short on brain cells to believe that just posting a few screenshots is going to be enough here.
Comments
If you think that when there is a glaring opportunity to maximise profit by having a small algorithm that retains custom and increase rake, would you be prepared to accept this would at least be considered in an industry that ALL the other games operate that way? Unless you think slots, bingo, blacjack are completely random? We all accept there is a percentage win rate in these games and that rate is controlled by sites.
As The Gambling Commision regulate online poker alongside these games that are confirmed as controlled, why would this be the only one that isnt? If you ever speak with them, they think poker is a game of total luck and there is no-one there who knows the difference between poker and slots. All this is fact, ring them for yourself!
So if you think the old saying of why would poker sites risk their licence if found out, the answer is absolutely no-one is even beginning to look, so there is no risk whatsoever in its present state. If there ever was an announcement of proper regulation, which would take months, the algorithm could be removed overnight. There is zero risk.
Sites are basically regulated by the external auditors (The Gambling Commsion will tell you this openly, that they have no involvement other then issuing certificates, which are totally issued on the findings of the external 3rd party auditor), who sites are paying huge amounts of money to audit their decks... if they outed one, they would have to out them all... which would finish the external audit business.... can you see a problem of conflict of interest there at all?
I think any non believer would have at least have to acknowledge that 'regulation' is at the very least, in such a state that it is open to any given site to do what many of us can plainly see.
This isnt a conspiracy theory, you just have to think that sites are businesses trying to make as much money as possible, whilst operating and pushing the boundaries of regulation, as in all fields of business. You know every business looks for legal loopholes, etc, i really dont understand why you would think this would be any different, especially when as far as The Gmabling Commission' are concerned, they are doing nothing wrong.
I think when you see the word 'regulated', many poker players think theres a poker expert team at The Gambling Commision, checking decks and outcomes. It just means sites are operating as finacially sound, secure and nothing more.
If you’ve discovered that small stacks win close to 100% of the time on a particular site, you could not lose. Enjoy it whilst it lasts.
Clearly, im saying the deck has an algorithm purely to prevent particulary bad plays from losing at the rate maths dictates. These players will still be losers from other all round poor play, but not so much that they cant maintain playing. This maintains site player numbers, which is critical for a site with only 700 players online. Its spreading out the wins a little by recognising those calls that are simply inexplicable, whilst also creating max rake at the same time in cash games.
I of course cant, unlike your suggestion 'do what he does and become a big winner', because all it is doing is preventing you from losing too much. You cant make a profit by playing extreme poor poker, but you certainly will not lose to the tune of what is anything like in line with maths.
So Neil, i appreciate as an ambassador for a site, its your job to defend them, but try to do a little better than this frankly childish post!
After the hand finishes, one says 'wow that was an internet hand' ... all of them have played hundreds of thousands of hands live and were wowed about this one hand, which on any given hour on any given day, you will encounter online.
If you could answer what you think the players meant by 'an internet hand', as your comment above suggests there is no difference?
I would keep any comments to ones that try and keep to the truth and factual
If you left 888 straight after this run it should be very easy to find your last hand histories and share them here. You can send a link to the HH file via pm so that people can see the facts.
not only do they double up auto, its always
3 of a kind or better.....
I haven't played on 888 in some time, but last I knew you could just download all the HH as one or a few files and then view them in a tracker, or even just as text.
Obviously you would have to be short on brain cells to believe that just posting a few screenshots is going to be enough here.