Merge and quads. At what point is this not right?

Despite playing at 4 or more poker rooms, the only one I ever see quads at on a regular basis is on Merge. Not accusing them of anything mind you. Just find it mighty damn strange. Am I playing there more? No. Actually, less. And yet, just never seen them at any other site, yet. No, I take that back; I have seen them on another site ONCE.

This is just from 4 out of 10 games played over a week or so. So far. I just started to keep good track of them. At what point does this become strange? Please, if you also run into them on a regular basis on or off a merge site, by all means, post it here (do not just claim it, prove it like I do below, please). Because I would love to hear how this makes any sense at all. Only at Merge? Apparently.








So, June 23, June 28, June 29, July 06; Out of ten games. If it is because they have more games played than anyone else, then why am I the one seeing this? It just does not add up.

So you played 10 freerolls and saw quads four times? How many hands does this equate to?

odds of quads:

Pocket pair hole cards:
C(48,3) / C(50,5) = 0.816%

Non pocket pair hole cards:
2 * C(47,2) / C(50,5) = 0.102%

Odds of flopping quads with a pocket pair is 407 to 1
Odds of board being three of a kind is 424 to 1

Let's say in those 10 freerolls you played 800 hands. If those hands are all played out, you should see quads 7 times. That you saw quads 4 times in around that many hands isn't super surprising then, especially as they are freerolls where it seems like more hands are played out.

Reptar7 said:

So you played 10 freerolls and saw quads four times? How many hands does this equate to?

Odds of quads:

Pocket pair hole cards:
C(48,3) / C(50,5) = 0.816%

Non pocket pair hole cards:
2 * C(47,2) / C(50,5) = 0.102%

Odds of flopping quads with a pocket pair is 407 to 1
Odds of board being three of a kind is 424 to 1

Let's say in those 10 freerolls you played 800 hands. If those hands are all played out, you should see quads 7 times. That you saw quads 4 times in around that many hands isn't super surprising then, especially as they are freerolls where it seems like more hands are played out.

Click to expand...

I don't think I was anywhere near 800 hands. And this is the only site I ever see them at, period. I have played 800 hands on other sites, easily. I'll see how many hands this was.

So, basically you are saying Merge does not have too many, the others have too few?

All I'm really saying is that quads occur 0.816% of the time with a pocket pair, and 0.102% with non-pocket cards. I'd think you'd see them more in freerolls as people are bad and more hands are played out. Hopefully the sites all deal cards randomly and the odds of quads are thus the same everywhere

Reptar7 said:

All I'm really saying is that quads occur 0.816% of the time with a pocket pair, and 0.102% with non-pocket cards. I'd think you'd see them more in freerolls as people are bad and more hands are played out. Hopefully the sites all deal cards randomly and the odds of quads are thus the same everywhere

Click to expand...

I think they are. Every person who has a large sample of hands of say 100k+ sees the odds of everything showing fairly close to what they should be within 1-3%.

OP- I think you could just be seeing a form of variance. I've heard of people who got AA or even royal flushes at a high rate in a short sample but in the end they even out.

Reptar7 said:

All I'm really saying is that quads occur 0.816% of the time with a pocket pair, and 0.102% with non-pocket cards. I'd think you'd see them more in freerolls as people are bad and more hands are played out. Hopefully the sites all deal cards randomly and the odds of quads are thus the same everywhere

Click to expand...

SofaKingCrazy said:

I think they are. Every person who has a large sample of hands of say 100k+ sees the odds of everything showing fairly close to what they should be within 1-3%.

OP- I think you could just be seeing a form of variance. I've heard of people who got AA or even royal flushes at a high rate in a short sample but in the end they even out.

Click to expand...

Must be. It was less than 500 hands, all four games.

For 1 hour of play time, you could see up to 125 to 200 hands in that hour, of playing.
How long did you last in the games??

SofaKingCrazy said:

I think they are. Every person who has a large sample of hands of say 100k+ sees the odds of everything showing fairly close to what they should be within 1-3%.

OP- I think you could just be seeing a form of variance. I've heard of people who got AA or even royal flushes at a high rate in a short sample but in the end they even out.

Click to expand...

I wish that were true. Sadly, I have a database of around a million hands and have run terrible.

kidkvno1 said:

For 1 hour of play time, you could see up to 125 to 200 hands in that hour, of playing.
How long did you last in the games??

Click to expand...

125 to 200 per hour? In a merge MTT? I'm lucky to see two-three hands per 5 minute level! 3800 players to start, 360 (in the money) by second hour, under 100 hands easy. Those knuckleheads take forever. Or do you mean total hands played at all tables during the game? If that is the case, you are correct and It might be even more than that. Just a coincidence? Maybe it is something on my computer (processor temp, whatever they use for RNG). But that cannot be, I am not in all of those hands. Unless it uses everyones computer's "whatever-its-reading" for the RNG.

Still; I have yet to ever see but one on the other sites I play MTT's at, I play more hands at other sites (more games) so, that is why I am wondering. If merge is correct, then maybe the other sites are off? Maybe I just am not seeing those, they are on other tables. That could explain it.

I am going to keep better track, record total hands each time, mine, the game, etc. Something just is not adding up. I even used to see them every other game when I played the fun steps, 10 in total, less than 1000 hands in all. That was what got me to wondering in the first place.

i only play an occassional CC game on merge because of , well , just what you said. seems strange

But if it is 10 MTT's at 100 hands per hour and you make it to the second hour sometimes, that is like 1k hands or more.

quads aren't rare at all.

Not a good enough sample size to support your findings. I have a 10,000 sample size (100k would obviously give you a better comparison) that shows just as many quads live as there are online. The reason it seems like you run into them more online is that you see so many more hands than you do live in any given tournament, SnG, or cash game session.

NateVest said:

Not a good enough sample size to support your findings. I have a 10,000 sample size (100k would obviously give you a better comparison) that shows just as many quads live as there are online. The reason it seems like you run into them more online is that you see so many more hands than you do live in any given tournament, SnG, or cash game session.

Click to expand...

Right. Makes sense. But why do I not ever see them on any site in a game of the exact same type, number of players, etc? So if merge is correct, maybe others are off?