It’s more like 1 in 150 as whichever hand you lost to you’d be posting up the result.
And you’re right, you wouldn’t usually get this amount of action, probably another reason why online small stake MTTs are different to the WSOP live main event.
It’s good to know the enhanced hands poor player algorithm isn’t just intellectual property of Sky Poker, guess they’re all at it, for good business reasons - Galfond would agree.
Every time i answer another enhanced hand comes along as im writing it. Here i have trip 3 with the nut low draw. If i make the nut low, im at least sharing the pot (these are all terrible players, so their hands could be literally anything). If i counterfeit my low draw, i make full house. Winner, winner chicken din.... ahhh one of two only cards left that could make a flush and me not make a low comes... and no improvement river.
Special hands, all day every day.....
Player
Action
Cards
Amount
Pot
Balance
fish4it231
Small blind
10.00
10.00
1930.00
TheWaddy
Big blind
20.00
30.00
2000.00
Your hole cards
7
2
3
A
joker51
Fold
cyril1957
Call
20.00
50.00
1655.00
fish4it231
Raise
50.00
100.00
1880.00
TheWaddy
Call
40.00
140.00
1960.00
cyril1957
Call
40.00
180.00
1615.00
Flop
4
3
3
fish4it231
Check
TheWaddy
Bet
90.00
270.00
1870.00
cyril1957
Raise
450.00
720.00
1165.00
fish4it231
Raise
1620.00
2340.00
260.00
TheWaddy
All-in
1870.00
4210.00
0.00
cyril1957
All-in
1165.00
5375.00
0.00
fish4it231
All-in
260.00
5635.00
0.00
TheWaddy
Unmatched bet
80.00
5555.00
80.00
fish4it231
Show
7
2
Q
A
TheWaddy
Show
7
2
3
A
cyril1957
Show
A
J
3
K
Turn
10
River
K
cyril1957
Win high
Full House, 3s and Kings
5025.00
5025.00
fish4it231
Win high
Flush to the Queen
530.00
530.00
No qualifying low hand
You have a hand that looks good there. But, as often happens in PLO8, other players also have good hands. Nothing "enhanced" about it-everyone is playing their best 2 cards from 4, as opposed to 2/2 for NLH. I know that. You know that. Everybody who has played a decent amount of PLO8 knows that. And to pretend otherwise is just sad. It's not "special hands"-it is the extra cards making all possibilities more likely.
You love putting up the poker odds calculator when it suits your arguments. But not when they do not.
Chances of scoop for you on that flop with those 3 hands? 0%. Chance of winning high/splitting high? 18%/35% Chances of winning/splitting low? 0%/71%
So-you lose the hand nearly 30% of the time. Have less chips after the hand well over 75% of the time.
And this is a hand where you think you got particularly unlucky? "Two cards" indeed You had what looked like a very strong hand. But it was you who needed luck there-not your opponents.
Its an enhanced hand kindagarten, all the point was..... and the flush coming with just 5 clubs left.... although chopping the low between 2 at 71.5% and being 2nd fave for hi, u know isnt really that bad three handed
Depends on how you count it.
On 1 level, you play that set of hands 100 times, you are losing money.
On another, I'm getting the chips in, not expecting to be slightly behind.
On the 3rd, at a loss to know why you posted the hand...
It’s more like 1 in 150 as whichever hand you lost to you’d be posting up the result.
And you’re right, you wouldn’t usually get this amount of action, probably another reason why online small stake MTTs are different to the WSOP live main event.
It’s good to know the enhanced hands poor player algorithm isn’t just intellectual property of Sky Poker, guess they’re all at it, for good business reasons - Galfond would agree.
I think i have made it clear that there is not an online poker site at this moment in time that has gone on their own with providing a real life poker experience.... its not a 'poor player algorithm', its just enhanced hands, ive become to realise this is all it has to be in order for it to have the desired effect...
Anyway enough about me, as we know the score there.
Lets talk about Daniel Negreanu playing online poker and saying 'i dont care anymore'... 'i dont care about the money'... 'it goes totally against ICM, but i dont care'... and whether a seasoned pro of that stature would ever say or do that in a live WSOP tournament....
If you think 'yes'...then he is just about done as a top pro, right?
EssexPhil and the vast majority swerved this one..... lets try again....
Didn't "swerve"-don't read most of your posts. On the basis that they nearly all say the same thing.
I have had the pleasure of sharing a table with Mr Negreanu. Exceptional poker player.
However, he is considerably better live than he is online. Simply because his ability to do the things live that differ from online are exceptional. His reading skills, his "nice guy" persona, the fear factor, his ability to show cards just often enough to convince some players he is not "at it".
ICM is a very important part of poker. But it is exactly that-an important part. Because ICM, as primarily a maths concept, necessarily assumes that various other factors are constant. When they are not.
Here are 2 examples for a player like Mr Negreanu which show how this works in practice:-
1. He has been sponsored for many years by Stars/GG. As part of that, he will get free buy-ins to various live/online tournaments. Taking a 45/55 gamble might be bad regarding ICM, but not if someone else is paying for the re-entry.
2. ICM does not deal with the extra benefit a skilled player (particularly 1 far more skilled than the rest of the table) gets from having more chips than his opponents. He would naturally wield those chips to extra advantage
Mr Negreanu has certainly said many things in the past that I disagree with. But many of them, while objectively not great, tend to work rather well for Daniel Negreanu.
Think u just swerved the main part.... Would he ever lose the plot at a live event to the extent that he totally lost his discipline that we were seeing several times at different online tournaments?... to the extent that he openly said 'i dont care anymore', about the money, about correct play, about anything...
I think not. Only the compounded results of online poker can do that to a top player.
He pushes chairs, he maybe thumps a table... but im guessing he would never tilt to the extent of not caring. Thats not a successful player. Even when Helmuth vents for several minutes, he doesnt lose his discipline or tilts in his play..... its only a loser who does that.
So online poker is clearly provoking a reaction out of him, that only that version can do.
Almost all 'tilt' is an accumulation of built up emotion. It generally takes a succession of bad beats to cause people to show frustration. AA gets cracked the first time it's whatever...it's variance. Experience 5/6 of those coolers in a row and that's when people start to get frustrated.
It's easier to get frustrated online as almost everyone is multi tabling and playing significantly more hands and thus the chances of experiencing a succession of frustrating hands is increased.
Your argument that it's online hands causing him to freak out makes no sense. We don't freak out in public because we have social skills. He got annoyed, calmed down and decided to share the experience, that's not the same.
you would like to think that if DNegs was playing a massive buy in, online, he would be more focused.......that i dont care statement, mabe thats a reflection of the free or small buy in fee (for him). maybe its fun money and not serious for him.
fwiw i am also open to your pov regards enhanced hands or futher rigged debate stuff but I believe these things are much less likely, simply because there are too many people involved, if poker was not straight up, the cat would be out the bag, there are too many braggers, too many employees......someone always lets slip, there is always an edward snowden........or a disgruntled member of staff or someone unhappy or jealous because they aint "getting enough".
one thing i think you should be commended on is your ability to stay motivated playing £1 games.....i think a lotta players struggle to take micro games serious, esp after playing much larger buy in games.......i know i struggle with this sometimes, esp on stars, with 8game.
If it wasnt serious to him, he would not be having a complete meltdown! He also shouts something along the lines of 'ffs we are playing for wsop bracelets here'..... where he is dedicating hours and hours of his time for. Hes serious, believe.
The money i make from micro games is still good money to me, so i play to the best of my ability and treat it as serious as i ever have done, regardless of the stakes.
I hear your argument on employees, but im not sure to what extent sites develop their own decks. Im pretty sure the software will be 'bought in'.
Your argument that it's online hands causing him to freak out makes no sense. We don't freak out in public because we have social skills. He got annoyed, calmed down and decided to share the experience, that's not the same.
Its not so much the freaking out, its the quotes he makes that he 'has given up' and starts playing hands because 'he doesnt care'... if he did this in all games live, he would never have made it as a player, nevermind one of the most famous.
So clearly its only online play, that can produce this reaction from him.
it dont matter where the software comes from imo.....there will be a team or teams of people working on the development of this stuff, if something was up with it, someone would let slip, they always do. greed rules......
.and someone wanting more cash, then some more, then more still to keep quiet, would likely get around, if jim is getting a million, jane would want 2 million and jason aint staying quiet for less than 5, such a situation is very unlikely to continue for very long.
Then there is not even any ex employee quacks saying this stuff, like you get with ufos and mental ex-classified folked and the like, it would not be worth it for the industry, there would be no profit in it, no way something dodgy stays secret, its a billion dollar industry, and greed would dictate the outcome.
Just think you overestimate 'the scandal'... i would say something like less than 0.1% of the uk population play poker online.
Absolutely every other form of casino gambling on a poker site is known to be controlled, not by chance and accepted as so. Same as online bingo....scratchcards, slots in real life, the lot.
99% + of the population therfore would think poker was no different... there would be no shock or scandal.
The answer to the Gambling Commision if it was proven? Its something we have in place to protect players from losing too much..... Now could the GC even begin to think to shut down a site for doing that in this day and age, when that is the major thing they are pushing for sites to do?
yet, if it was known that every scratch card in the uk was a loser, except the one given to jim, lotto owners brother, it would certainly be a scandal, the general population/government would demand that lotto was shut down,
the population doesnt care about gambling on mass, but everyone deserving the same chance is defo a view everyone would hold, if they knew that jim had a better chance than jane it would irk them enough to demand change. im pretty sure of it
that example was pretty ****, but its how my mind works, i hope it put across the right point.
But Jims not got a better chance than jane... Its Jane whos winning... its just that jim is not losing as much as he should and odds dictate he should...... its actually sharing round the wins more than they should.
The public would embrace that, not 'be irked'... a well known phrase is 'sharing is caring'... who wud be against that!
Comments
And you’re right, you wouldn’t usually get this amount of action, probably another reason why online small stake MTTs are different to the WSOP live main event.
It’s good to know the enhanced hands poor player algorithm isn’t just intellectual property of Sky Poker, guess they’re all at it, for good business reasons - Galfond would agree.
You love putting up the poker odds calculator when it suits your arguments. But not when they do not.
Chances of scoop for you on that flop with those 3 hands? 0%.
Chance of winning high/splitting high? 18%/35%
Chances of winning/splitting low? 0%/71%
So-you lose the hand nearly 30% of the time.
Have less chips after the hand well over 75% of the time.
And this is a hand where you think you got particularly unlucky? "Two cards" indeed
You had what looked like a very strong hand. But it was you who needed luck there-not your opponents.
It is very common in PLO8.
Again u guys put words in my mouth. At no point am i claiming to be unlucky in the outcome....
On 1 level, you play that set of hands 100 times, you are losing money.
On another, I'm getting the chips in, not expecting to be slightly behind.
On the 3rd, at a loss to know why you posted the hand...
Lets talk about Daniel Negreanu playing online poker and saying 'i dont care anymore'... 'i dont care about the money'... 'it goes totally against ICM, but i dont care'... and whether a seasoned pro of that stature would ever say or do that in a live WSOP tournament....
If you think 'yes'...then he is just about done as a top pro, right?
I have had the pleasure of sharing a table with Mr Negreanu. Exceptional poker player.
However, he is considerably better live than he is online. Simply because his ability to do the things live that differ from online are exceptional. His reading skills, his "nice guy" persona, the fear factor, his ability to show cards just often enough to convince some players he is not "at it".
ICM is a very important part of poker. But it is exactly that-an important part. Because ICM, as primarily a maths concept, necessarily assumes that various other factors are constant. When they are not.
Here are 2 examples for a player like Mr Negreanu which show how this works in practice:-
1. He has been sponsored for many years by Stars/GG. As part of that, he will get free buy-ins to various live/online tournaments. Taking a 45/55 gamble might be bad regarding ICM, but not if someone else is paying for the re-entry.
2. ICM does not deal with the extra benefit a skilled player (particularly 1 far more skilled than the rest of the table) gets from having more chips than his opponents. He would naturally wield those chips to extra advantage
Mr Negreanu has certainly said many things in the past that I disagree with. But many of them, while objectively not great, tend to work rather well for Daniel Negreanu.
And it is not a team game.
I think not. Only the compounded results of online poker can do that to a top player.
He pushes chairs, he maybe thumps a table... but im guessing he would never tilt to the extent of not caring. Thats not a successful player. Even when Helmuth vents for several minutes, he doesnt lose his discipline or tilts in his play..... its only a loser who does that.
So online poker is clearly provoking a reaction out of him, that only that version can do.
It's easier to get frustrated online as almost everyone is multi tabling and playing significantly more hands and thus the chances of experiencing a succession of frustrating hands is increased.
We don't freak out in public because we have social skills.
He got annoyed, calmed down and decided to share the experience,
that's not the same.
you would like to think that if DNegs was playing a massive buy in, online, he would be more focused.......that i dont care statement, mabe thats a reflection of the free or small buy in fee (for him). maybe its fun money and not serious for him.
fwiw i am also open to your pov regards enhanced hands or futher rigged debate stuff but I believe these things are much less likely, simply because there are too many people involved, if poker was not straight up, the cat would be out the bag, there are too many braggers, too many employees......someone always lets slip, there is always an edward snowden........or a disgruntled member of staff or someone unhappy or jealous because they aint "getting enough".
one thing i think you should be commended on is your ability to stay motivated playing £1 games.....i think a lotta players struggle to take micro games serious, esp after playing much larger buy in games.......i know i struggle with this sometimes, esp on stars, with 8game.
The money i make from micro games is still good money to me, so i play to the best of my ability and treat it as serious as i ever have done, regardless of the stakes.
I hear your argument on employees, but im not sure to what extent sites develop their own decks. Im pretty sure the software will be 'bought in'. Its not so much the freaking out, its the quotes he makes that he 'has given up' and starts playing hands because 'he doesnt care'... if he did this in all games live, he would never have made it as a player, nevermind one of the most famous.
So clearly its only online play, that can produce this reaction from him.
.and someone wanting more cash, then some more, then more still to keep quiet, would likely get around, if jim is getting a million, jane would want 2 million and jason aint staying quiet for less than 5, such a situation is very unlikely to continue for very long.
Then there is not even any ex employee quacks saying this stuff, like you get with ufos and mental ex-classified folked and the like, it would not be worth it for the industry, there would be no profit in it, no way something dodgy stays secret, its a billion dollar industry, and greed would dictate the outcome.
Absolutely every other form of casino gambling on a poker site is known to be controlled, not by chance and accepted as so. Same as online bingo....scratchcards, slots in real life, the lot.
99% + of the population therfore would think poker was no different... there would be no shock or scandal.
The answer to the Gambling Commision if it was proven? Its something we have in place to protect players from losing too much..... Now could the GC even begin to think to shut down a site for doing that in this day and age, when that is the major thing they are pushing for sites to do?
the population doesnt care about gambling on mass, but everyone deserving the same chance is defo a view everyone would hold, if they knew that jim had a better chance than jane it would irk them enough to demand change. im pretty sure of it
that example was pretty ****, but its how my mind works, i hope it put across the right point.
The public would embrace that, not 'be irked'... a well known phrase is 'sharing is caring'... who wud be against that!