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.
3 straight flushes in 40 mins
TheWaddy
Member Posts: 1,592
in Poker Chat
As you know im not a fan of the 'you see more hands online' excuse.... so in less than 100 hands in less than 40 mins.....
TheWaddy said:
Player Action Cards Amount Pot Balance LIBBYLOO Small blind 20.00 20.00 1720.00 TheWaddy Big blind 40.00 60.00 1220.00 Your hole cards
- K
- 6
- 9
- Q
LIBBYLOO Call 20.00 80.00 1700.00 TheWaddy Check Flop
- J
- 8
- 10
TheWaddy Bet 40.00 120.00 1180.00 LIBBYLOO Fold TheWaddy Muck TheWaddy Win 80.00 1260.00 TheWaddy Return 40.00 0.00 1300.00
Comments
Essexphil and Mattbates may have better comments but I want to know... what are tonight's winning lottery numbers?
It is not that someone can believe the deck is rigged in some way. It is not the fact that someone can alter their play in the belief that the deck is rigged, causing them to play suboptimally. Because they not only genuinely believe that there is some sort of "fix" going on. That they alone can understand, and adjust to. Ignoring the fact that a lot of the best mathematicians, statisticians and probability/game theorists in the World play poker. And have found nothing.
Not that someone like Sky Poker who, let's face it, have the computer capabilities of a Sinclair ZX-81 and 2 rubber bands, and would be incapable of doing it even if they wanted to.
I cannot, and never will, understand the logic behind any of this sort of stuff. That an industry worth billions would risk everything for a pretty much non-existent gain.
It is that someone believing all that can still be a winning player.
Which should give hope to everybody.
Sort of swerved it here!
Thought id show this incredible offering, as i usually get 'your lying', 'your a ****.' etc etc etc..... id really like to ask Doyle Brunson, Amarillo Slim and the likes if they had ever had 40 mins like this, or had seen it..... although it may have took a marathon 90mins to get through the same number of hands live.
Or maybe they only remember the bad beats and its been long forgotten.
If you could send us a link where mathematicians, theorists and statisticians have audited online poker id love to read about it. Ive googled it, cant find anything?
Im not being funny, just cant. I would be really interested in reading both sides of the tale. When i have googled it one the first things i saw was very recent cheat cases at Pokerstars.... something all sites have claimed in the past to be 'impossible'.....
It is hard to trust sites who continually lie whilst insisting you have to believe in their integrity in order to play there!
1 you cant shout your lying
2 you cant shout prove it
3 its not a case of seeing more hands online
4 its not a case of just remembering the bad beats
5 the odds are so fantastically against it, theres no attempt to say its not unusual
So, there is no 'clever' replies available, we have silence.....
But it was on the Playstation......
Is it possible for cheating to occur in online poker? Yes. In most cases, in exactly the same way as Live poker. Collusion. It is easy to do. So, for example, an unusual-sized bet when holding AA, flat calls from colluders, pricing in the unwary.
The main difference is the hand histories/record-keeping. On a one-off basis, far easier to get away with live than online. The other difference is, of course, the ability to view cards. Last reported online instance was the 1 you mentioned in this post before you amended it. Absolute Poker. In 2007. Spotted, incidentally, by a poker-playing mathematician-"CrazyMarco".
Important to remember that the UIGEA in the US in 2006 caused massive problems for US sites. Most chose the legal option, like Party. Some chose a rather riskier option, like Stars. Whereas Cereus (the owner of Ultimate/Absolute) chose (at least temporarily, maybe longer) a distinctly illegal approach.
It's important always to look at Risk/Reward. Poker-only sites in 2007/08 had a risk that was a tiny fraction of today's sites. Coupled with far less Regulation, and far less sophisticated tools to spot it. And-for 14-15 years, there has been no known instance of site-led cheating. Even with the dodgy US sites that have operated outside the UIGEA (where I believe it would have been far more likely).
No-one can prove a site is not cheating. Whereas someone can prove if they are. And no-one has for many years.
And if you won't accept that, or at least stop whining about it, then you are going to get banned.
Not because Sky will want to. Because the po-faced Regulator will insist.
Wonder what the odds were on Scott Seiver buying in 43 times in the flip and go at the Wsop
8 players, dealt 3 cards, see the flop and discard one.
If it’s not 0% it’s going to happen, be it online or live.
Do you find odds / maths interesting? I do.
Your post is interesting, thanks.
We look at this in different ways, what is your perception of how often the hand should happen?
Let’s say it ‘should’ happen every 2 hours ( depending how many hands are dealt site wide)
What WOULD be seemingly ‘rigged’ is that it happens every 2 hours on the dot, weird eh.
Must just be rigged for you.
I have however been dealt back to back to back AA as iv been dealt back to beck to back 72.
The ways in which people remove the reality that they dobt work hard enough so they are not good enough to beat the fame never fails to amaze me.
Odds of getting a straight flush in NLHE is about 3,600-1.
Whereas in PLO/PLO8 it is about 1,100-1.
Still rare. But not nearly as rare
Odds of getting 3 straight flushes over a given period at PLO/PLO8 is about the same as getting 1 in NLHE...
Alot of players mention 'getting banned' when i post what i feel will be interesting to some and theres a 'copy and paste' option on viewing your own hand history. There is also a 'bad beats and variance' section on the Forum, which will always attract disgruntled players.
If these options are going to be used to 'trap' players into a ban, then its a poor show.
If you read any reviews on any online poker sites, clearly players are completely split on whether what they are seeing is a random occurence or not. If they start banning players just for having doubts on daily occurences of huge odds being overturned, then online poker will die very quickly. For it accounts for at least 50% of players. But we play as for most of us its the only place we can and we accept everything that comes with it. But we make the mistake of thinking we can chat about it.
If a certain dealer in a casino produces huge odds over and over, a player would start to doubt the dealer. In the old days, if a horse won at over 25-1 or so, there was an automatic stewards enquiry into how it could possibly happen. Its natural to question how on earth something is happening if odds say it shouldnt. Thats life.
Im happy to leave the forum to the guys who get angry and ultra defensive talking about what will always, im afraid, be the number one subject in online poker. Or maybe I will do a St Mark, who knows.....
Do you seriously think the odds of getting a straight flush from 9 cards (with the restriction of 3/5 and 2/4) isn't easier than from 7 cards? Best you stick to the £1 games, then.
The point I am making is that you persistently bet into a market that you believe is bent.
Do I care? No. Do Sky care? No idea. Does the Regulator believe that sites have a duty to ban such players? Yes. Therefore, will Sky be taking a risk allowing you to continue betting? Yes.
That's life. You can bang on endlessly. Or you can adapt. One of them is likely to lead to you being banned. Do I agree with that? Actually, no. But that won't stop it happening.
I disagree with pretty much everything you say. But that isn't why I am saying this. You clearly derive pleasure from playing poker. And I am trying to help you continue to do that.