How does that hand fit with the narrative on this thread?
I would say it fits perfectly....
Ok, now I’m confused. How about the second hand I posted - 10 J v 10 7 on a 10hi flop?
I’m trying to follow the narrative, I really am, but I don’t quite get the gist of it. Does the worst hand pre win, the biggest stack, the shortest stack, the middle stack, the most bounties, the least bounties?
Its all about changing the lead several times (maximising rake, it all runs off the same deck before you say its a tournament), sharing out the wins (keeping as many on site as possible) and maintaining customer numbers.
The boy Galfond in the clip even agreed player traffic is paramount to a site over everything else. You can find ways to combat the fact its trying to share out the wins and be a winning player by not falling for the situations where you are being set up to lose big. You can spot these as in the AA25 example above. The deck can only do so much to help an opponent, it cant control the bets and calls. So you avoid the obvious spots.
If you have ever played the 6.30pm freeroll with its unrelenting runners and incredible hands, then im not sure why a seasoned player could ever think that it was all normal. This tourn highlights online poker for what it is, as so many are prepared to pump or dump.
Anyway on to the next one; This guy hit no fewer than 13 rivers to survive by either splitting or scooping at various odds throughout the game. It would not let him lose. He miraculously won the game.... by hiting a silly river.... But on the plus side another for the collection;
Even had one of his own in the many. many attempts he made to lose. Notice he was the one who went all in, not me.... its simply never gonna allow a giveaway that cheaply as we have discussed. Still no-one has managed to post a hand were they WERE allowed to giveaway and it not blocked.;
Its all about changing the lead several times (maximising rake, it all runs off the same deck before you say its a tournament), sharing out the wins (keeping as many on site as possible) and maintaining customer numbers.
The boy Galfond in the clip even agreed player traffic is paramount to a site over everything else. You can find ways to combat the fact its trying to share out the wins and be a winning player by not falling for the situations where you are being set up to lose big. You can spot these as in the AA25 example above. The deck can only do so much to help an opponent, it cant control the bets and calls. So you avoid the obvious spots.
If you have ever played the 6.30pm freeroll with its unrelenting runners and incredible hands, then im not sure why a seasoned player could ever think that it was all normal. This tourn highlights online poker for what it is, as so many are prepared to pump or dump.
In the first hand I posted, do you think the AK guy and the A10 guy would be more, or less inclined to play ( keeping as many on site as possible)
Its all about changing the lead several times (maximising rake, it all runs off the same deck before you say its a tournament), sharing out the wins (keeping as many on site as possible) and maintaining customer numbers.
The boy Galfond in the clip even agreed player traffic is paramount to a site over everything else. You can find ways to combat the fact its trying to share out the wins and be a winning player by not falling for the situations where you are being set up to lose big. You can spot these as in the AA25 example above. The deck can only do so much to help an opponent, it cant control the bets and calls. So you avoid the obvious spots.
If you have ever played the 6.30pm freeroll with its unrelenting runners and incredible hands, then im not sure why a seasoned player could ever think that it was all normal. This tourn highlights online poker for what it is, as so many are prepared to pump or dump.
In the first hand I posted, do you think the AK guy and the A10 guy would be more, or less inclined to play ( keeping as many on site as possible)
The average player is here for a bit of excitement, but is a terrible player. There is much more terrible players than good. Therefore it satisfies the needs of the majority, rather than very much the minority of solid winning players. Poor leisure players are winning plenty of these in similar situations, their fix is fulfilled.
Solid players. like me inc, accept it as we can combat the onslaught by playing savvy. Everyones a winner!
tum te tum te tum.. the handful of games are giving me so much ammo today.... nice turn and river here, what would it be like if we had enhanced hands too? Wouldnt that be something....
Is anyone prepared to say this is quite something? Just an acknowledgement of something from the 'poker experts'? Maybe even Channing might want to comment on the unusual amount?
It all appears to be a smokescreen, as im going through one of the worst runs HU ive ever experienced, losing to players that are playing in a manner that just couldnt get through a slow structured omaha hi lo game and win..... it really just doesnt add up.....
It all appears to be a smokescreen, as im going through one of the worst runs HU ive ever experienced, losing to players that are playing in a manner that just couldnt get through a slow structured omaha hi lo game and win..... it really just doesnt add up.....
At least you're getting Lots'o'Quads LISA ...... tho' if you're going through one of the worst runs you've ever experienced, maybe you should just FOLD them LISA
On Page 1 of this thread, you mistakenly claimed the chances of getting quads in PLO was 0.0048%. Or about 1 in 20,000 hands. I pointed out it was about 1 in 200 hands.
So-if you play 200 hands of PLO/PLO8 a day to the river, you are going to hold quads on average once a day. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Nothing remarkable. At all.
Why are you on a bad run? That's simple. You are making adjustments about your fantasy "deviation" from the typical runout of cards.
You believe that Sky, whose technology appears to consist of a Sinclair Spectrum and a Rubber Band, somehow has the technological knowhow (as well as the desire) to manipulate the outcome of cards.
Which is causing you to play badly. So-carry on in your belief. By all means. Keep convincing yourself you are right, and everyone else is wrong.
It's your money. Play it how you like. I think you overestimate the amount of terrible players there are on here. They reduce every year. Must still be some at £1 Heads Up. Making adjustments based on reads on particular players is entirely sensible.
Making adjustments based on your perception of the deck being skewed? No. That is setting fire to money. But it's your money.
To raise when u should is setting fire to money online my friend....
Another site says;
In Omaha, getting quads isn’t so easy. You should get them roughly 0.2 percent of the time. To ensure you get to showdown, only check and call with your sets or quads on all streets.
Im gonna maintain its unusual, this suggests 500-1.... but it appears no-one really knows the actual odds as you eggheads come up with differing views... but as this says, it isnt easy.
Depends what deck you using to what the odds are, would be an explanation to all the differing views.
To raise when u should is setting fire to money online my friend....
Another site says;
In Omaha, getting quads isn’t so easy. You should get them roughly 0.2 percent of the time. To ensure you get to showdown, only check and call with your sets or quads on all streets.
Im gonna maintain its unusual, this suggests 500-1.... but it appears no-one really knows the actual odds as you eggheads come up with differing views... but as this says, it isnt easy.
Depends what deck you using to what the odds are, would be an explanation to all the differing views.
The 0.2% figure is because people assume you are folding a lot of hands pre-flop and on the flop. True for MTTs-but not for HU poker. The frequency depends on how many hands you fold. Which, in HU, is not many.
The advice is terrible. The aim is to get your opponent to commit as many chips as possible, particularly where there is no definite low hand. How you achieve that is almost entirely player dependant. And who on God's Earth is going to just call on the river? That suggests you should play sets and quads the same way
Anyway-bored of this now. You keep playing your £1 games the way you want.
On Page 1 of this thread, you mistakenly claimed the chances of getting quads in PLO was 0.0048%. Or about 1 in 20,000 hands. I pointed out it was about 1 in 200 hands.
So-if you play 200 hands of PLO/PLO8 a day to the river, you are going to hold quads on average once a day. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Nothing remarkable. At all.
Why are you on a bad run? That's simple. You are making adjustments about your fantasy "deviation" from the typical runout of cards.
You believe that Sky, whose technology appears to consist of a Sinclair Spectrum and a Rubber Band, somehow has the technological knowhow (as well as the desire) to manipulate the outcome of cards.
Which is causing you to play badly. So-carry on in your belief. By all means. Keep convincing yourself you are right, and everyone else is wrong.
It's your money. Play it how you like. I think you overestimate the amount of terrible players there are on here. They reduce every year. Must still be some at £1 Heads Up. Making adjustments based on reads on particular players is entirely sensible.
Making adjustments based on your perception of the deck being skewed? No. That is setting fire to money. But it's your money.
I think your are being remarkably unkind to Sir Clive......
Comments
The tinkering with the R.N.G. making it do what you are suggesting. Mmm!
Or is the Cookie Cleaner disturbing the Spiders that are holding everything together.
We would all love a new truly random number generator but for now, we are stuck with
"The care in the community one."
How about the second hand I posted - 10 J v 10 7 on a 10hi flop?
I’m trying to follow the narrative, I really am, but I don’t quite get the gist of it.
Does the worst hand pre win, the biggest stack, the shortest stack, the middle stack, the most bounties, the least bounties?
Or….any of the above?
The boy Galfond in the clip even agreed player traffic is paramount to a site over everything else. You can find ways to combat the fact its trying to share out the wins and be a winning player by not falling for the situations where you are being set up to lose big. You can spot these as in the AA25 example above. The deck can only do so much to help an opponent, it cant control the bets and calls. So you avoid the obvious spots.
If you have ever played the 6.30pm freeroll with its unrelenting runners and incredible hands, then im not sure why a seasoned player could ever think that it was all normal. This tourn highlights online poker for what it is, as so many are prepared to pump or dump.
Solid players. like me inc, accept it as we can combat the onslaught by playing savvy. Everyones a winner!
So-if you play 200 hands of PLO/PLO8 a day to the river, you are going to hold quads on average once a day. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Nothing remarkable. At all.
Why are you on a bad run? That's simple. You are making adjustments about your fantasy "deviation" from the typical runout of cards.
You believe that Sky, whose technology appears to consist of a Sinclair Spectrum and a Rubber Band, somehow has the technological knowhow (as well as the desire) to manipulate the outcome of cards.
Which is causing you to play badly. So-carry on in your belief. By all means. Keep convincing yourself you are right, and everyone else is wrong.
It's your money. Play it how you like. I think you overestimate the amount of terrible players there are on here. They reduce every year. Must still be some at £1 Heads Up. Making adjustments based on reads on particular players is entirely sensible.
Making adjustments based on your perception of the deck being skewed? No. That is setting fire to money. But it's your money.
Another site says;
In Omaha, getting quads isn’t so easy. You should get them roughly 0.2 percent of the time. To ensure you get to showdown, only check and call with your sets or quads on all streets.
Im gonna maintain its unusual, this suggests 500-1.... but it appears no-one really knows the actual odds as you eggheads come up with differing views... but as this says, it isnt easy.
Depends what deck you using to what the odds are, would be an explanation to all the differing views.
The advice is terrible. The aim is to get your opponent to commit as many chips as possible, particularly where there is no definite low hand. How you achieve that is almost entirely player dependant. And who on God's Earth is going to just call on the river? That suggests you should play sets and quads the same way
Anyway-bored of this now. You keep playing your £1 games the way you want.