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......
....and there's no way Sky have a rubber band too!
do i need to? im a winning player, playing against players who chase flushes on an all low flop with no low cards HU..... i think its a fair comment at the level im playing.
You believe that Sky, whose technology appears to consist of a Sinclair Spectrum and a Rubber Band
You think this of Skys ability to produce a card deck... so on that basis wouldnt it be a little limited to be something you could rely on and trust in? But you back online poker to the hilt?
Hmmm doesnt match up really does it. Alterior motives are there to see.
You appear to believe "simple" is the same as "corrupt". The point is, no sane poker operator would ever act in the way you suggest. And, even if by some miracle it wanted to, Sky lack the ability to do it.
I back online poker in the UK to the hilt. That is why I play on UK-facing sites. And if you do not, then you should not play. Not you, personally. Anyone.
Hey @TheWaddy you are like one of those yappy little dogs desperately running around looking for a leg to hump but everybody keeps shaking you off. Any dog with half a brain would understand that there is no leg available, however you persist in yap yap yap whilst proving the very definition of insanity.
You appear to believe "simple" is the same as "corrupt". The point is, no sane poker operator would ever act in the way you suggest. And, even if by some miracle it wanted to, Sky lack the ability to do it.
I back online poker in the UK to the hilt. That is why I play on UK-facing sites. And if you do not, then you should not play. Not you, personally. Anyone.
Once again , corrupt is a wholly inappropriate word. Its good business sense within the flimsy regulation and totally kosha as things stand. The fact is your selling online poker as something to trust and believe in 100%, whilst believing the technology is not only not up to scratch, but actually primitive, is about as contradicting a post you could make
You appear to believe "simple" is the same as "corrupt". The point is, no sane poker operator would ever act in the way you suggest. And, even if by some miracle it wanted to, Sky lack the ability to do it.
I back online poker in the UK to the hilt. That is why I play on UK-facing sites. And if you do not, then you should not play. Not you, personally. Anyone.
Once again , corrupt is a wholly inappropriate word. Its good business sense within the flimsy regulation and totally kosha as things stand. The fact is your selling online poker as something to trust and believe in 100%, whilst believing the technology is not only not up to scratch, but actually primitive, is about as contradicting a post you could make
That would not be "good business sense". That would be as corrupt as corrupt gets. And would be likely to result in the forced closure of a multi-billion pound business.
The Regulation is incredibly tight. And forever getting tighter. All gambling sites are spending massive amounts to pacify the Regulator.
Appreciate you won't accept that. But there appears to be a lot in real life that you refuse to accept.
Bit gutted cos i took a screenshot, where this opponent came out with 'ive never believed it to be random, just doesnt feel right'... gutted... its was massively apt as the end hand was all in turn and binksville tennessee;
Player
Action
Cards
Amount
Pot
Balance
TheWaddy
Small blind
30.00
30.00
1210.00
chichi160
Big blind
60.00
90.00
1700.00
Your hole cards
3
8
J
2
TheWaddy
Call
30.00
120.00
1180.00
chichi160
Check
Flop
2
8
2
chichi160
Bet
60.00
180.00
1640.00
TheWaddy
Raise
300.00
480.00
880.00
chichi160
Call
240.00
720.00
1400.00
Turn
5
chichi160
Bet
60.00
780.00
1340.00
TheWaddy
All-in
880.00
1660.00
0.00
chichi160
Call
820.00
2480.00
520.00
TheWaddy
Show
3
8
J
2
chichi160
Show
5
2
6
Q
River
Q
chichi160
Win high
Full House, 2s and Queens
2480.00
3000.00
No qualifying low hand
Sometimes you can get involved in a hand and forget your own advice.... dont raise an online deck with 2 cards to come, even though it is correct with a real deck.... An example of how not to play online poker, played it bad.....
It is of course, disappointing that you all brown nose a guy who openly says he feels Skys online poker offering is extremely primitive... yet uses his influence in this forum to make players to feel comfortable in that large amounts of money can be gambled using it. And also plays for large amounts himself (im guessing due to constant jibes at my levels).
I play for £1.
Yet he has suggested that i am the one that should be looked at as a problem gambler!
You appear to believe "simple" is the same as "corrupt". The point is, no sane poker operator would ever act in the way you suggest. And, even if by some miracle it wanted to, Sky lack the ability to do it.
I back online poker in the UK to the hilt. That is why I play on UK-facing sites. And if you do not, then you should not play. Not you, personally. Anyone.
Once again , corrupt is a wholly inappropriate word. Its good business sense within the flimsy regulation and totally kosha as things stand. The fact is your selling online poker as something to trust and believe in 100%, whilst believing the technology is not only not up to scratch, but actually primitive, is about as contradicting a post you could make
That would not be "good business sense". That would be as corrupt as corrupt gets. And would be likely to result in the forced closure of a multi-billion pound business.
The Regulation is incredibly tight. And forever getting tighter. All gambling sites are spending massive amounts to pacify the Regulator.
Appreciate you won't accept that. But there appears to be a lot in real life that you refuse to accept.
Regulation is tight on one thing only. Making sure people are not gambling beyond their means. Its in the news again today. People at the Gambling Commision have no affiliation to the game of poker. They are not poker purists like you guys, they would not understand that it is not just a game of pure luck.
In fact if something was found to be within a deck of cards that prevented players losing as much as what odds dictated, i would stick my neck out and them think this as a positive thing. To say they would force a closure just for protecting players losing too much in this current environment is laughable.
You have said i should be removed from playing as i may believe its not completely random. Well as i have recognised this as a feature, i have adjusted my level accordingly to a micro fun one from serious levels. I am a regulators shining example of adjusting it just for fun and my gambling record absolutely demonstrates that.
I would suggest someone playing large amounts with a deck he believes to be extremely primitive, with rubber bands and a sinclair spectrum involved... i would say that is displaying problematic behaviour over mine, any day of the week.
The deck is the same whether you're playing online, plastic coated, or Play Your Cards Right BIG cards........ there's 52 cards in it, and they can come out in any particular order....... SIMPLES LISA
Whatever you say or think, it will make no difference
GOOD LUCK with your Quest ......just stop being a MOANER LISA
Comments
You believe that Sky, whose technology appears to consist of a Sinclair Spectrum and a Rubber Band
You think this of Skys ability to produce a card deck... so on that basis wouldnt it be a little limited to be something you could rely on and trust in? But you back online poker to the hilt?
Hmmm doesnt match up really does it. Alterior motives are there to see.
.........with copious amounts of Orange Squash, and having to listen to you MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN, MOAN........
.....Some party LISA
I back online poker in the UK to the hilt. That is why I play on UK-facing sites. And if you do not, then you should not play. Not you, personally. Anyone.
Seek a leg elsewhere.
The Regulation is incredibly tight. And forever getting tighter. All gambling sites are spending massive amounts to pacify the Regulator.
Appreciate you won't accept that. But there appears to be a lot in real life that you refuse to accept.
I play for £1.
Yet he has suggested that i am the one that should be looked at as a problem gambler!
In fact if something was found to be within a deck of cards that prevented players losing as much as what odds dictated, i would stick my neck out and them think this as a positive thing. To say they would force a closure just for protecting players losing too much in this current environment is laughable.
You have said i should be removed from playing as i may believe its not completely random. Well as i have recognised this as a feature, i have adjusted my level accordingly to a micro fun one from serious levels. I am a regulators shining example of adjusting it just for fun and my gambling record absolutely demonstrates that.
I would suggest someone playing large amounts with a deck he believes to be extremely primitive, with rubber bands and a sinclair spectrum involved... i would say that is displaying problematic behaviour over mine, any day of the week.
Whatever you say or think, it will make no difference
GOOD LUCK with your Quest ......just stop being a MOANER LISA