| Party Poker | Titan Poker | PokerStars | Bodog | Pacific Poker |
|
|||||||

![]() |
|
Poker - Rigged: The AA test
|
  |
|
#141
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
#142
|
||||
|
||||
|
They are not. I'm prettey sure that the cost comes from their $10,000/yr licensing fee to the KMC. I looked this up about 3 years ago but I wouldn't object to anyone checking back into it. Like I said before, I'm not in league with any pokersites nor do I have blind faith in their integrity. I'd be very interested in the answer to this question. It would make a nice thread of it's own.
|
|
#144
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
#147
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi,
Yeah this sure has been a debate that has been raging for a long time. Just a few points that I think shoould be raised. 1) the odds of any pair is 1:169 per dealt hand. 2) you should be looking at the pairs EVERYHAND is dealt not just yours i.e for every deal the odds of a pocket pair for ANYONE is 1:169 3) What skews the results of what shows is the poker sites way of dealing the cards. The deck is randomly shuffled, then betting takes place, then the remaing cards are randomly shuffled AGAIN, before the flop is dealt, then betting, then shuffled. Poker sites say they do this because it stops software predicting the cards BUT what it is doing is skewing the deal. Hopefully this gives you something to think about. |
|
#149
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nobody has contributed any Ultimatebet stats yet. Why don't you donate yours and I'll add it to the table?
|
|
#155
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
#156
|
|||
|
|||
|
hello all, just spent a while reading this thread so figured I'd post my stats:
ipoker hands: 6885 AA: 29 About 2 short of expected I think. G p.s. I remember one of my very first hands - I got AA on a 2c/4c table. I got raised, so re-raised. Flop came. Other guy checked, I bet, he went all in. He turned over K4o. He hit his 2 pair on the turn. I was convinced he was cheating and got straight onto the live help for a rant. Nothing to it of course. That was several years ago. Have seen much stranger things since. I've actually had AA lose to 72o! |
|
#157
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Yes, you're 2 less than expected, but still close enough to ring the bell of statistical probability. You are very welcome ben. Thanks for reading. |
|
#158
|
||||
|
||||
|
Time for a facelift along with a few more of my own hands.
Full Tilt 5145 Hnds Dealt AA 23 Times Expected 23 PokerStars 2952 Hands Dealt AA 11 Times Expected 13 For anyone who wants to contribute to this project, don't think you have to do the math. Just post the number of ring hands, the number of times you've been dealt pocket aces and the site you played at. Don't forget to filter for the site in your preferences. Don't want to taint our results do we? Thanks to all for reading and contributing. |
|
#160
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
"Against logic, there is no armor like ignorance." -Laurence J. Peter |
|
#164
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have a very small sample size. But it demonstrates that it is rigged!
![]() WTF is up with 10 10?! Total hands 1683 Hand Times Dealt % AA 5 0.30% KK 7 0.42% QQ 7 0.42% JJ 7 0.42% TT 13 0.77% 99 10 0.59% 88 5 0.30% 77 3 0.18% Last edited by icemonkey9 : 26-02-2008 at 2:03 AM. Reason: formatting. |
|
#165
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Interesting spread on those pairs. The expected number is the same for all of them, 7 but the deviation for such a small sample is huge. If you look at the table, you'll also see how striking the differences in deviations at the different sites. There SHOULD be a direct relationship between the sample size and the deviation, and indeed, Pokerstars with the largest sample has the smallest deviation while Ultimatebet with the smallest sample has the largest. But there seems to be a little bump in the Full Tilt. results. iPoker with a sample size of just 1/5th that of Full Tilt seems to be more in line with what I'd expect. |
|
#166
|
|||
|
|||
|
I haven't posted here for a while and if you look back you will see posts with my extreme skeptism of poker sites. I have recently become very confident that the poker sites are in fact not rigged. Sorry OP but it wasn't this that convinced me. It was watching some poker videos that Gus Hansen made winning and losing $10K at a time. I seriously doubt he would be playing if he thought they were and I am sure that he has more experience than anyone posting here and would know pretty quickly if something was amiss. I could anticipate someone retorting that the sites would rig in his favor but he suffered some pretty bad beats. There is audio and I think his attitude really convinced me. He basically said oh well I lost $10k not a good day for me I'll try again tomorrow.
|
|
#167
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Kinda strange though how 1/2 a million hands from PokerStars won't convince you, but 50 from Gus Hansen will. |
|
#169
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#170
|
||||
|
||||
|
All poker sites are rigged.....period.
You guys can split hairs until the cows come home, but nothing would change my perception that when I play online poker, I'm playing against "the house" in some very important way. In other words, it's rigged.
Have a nice day. |
|
#171
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#172
|
||||
|
||||
|
four dogs do u want party poker stats as well?
|
|
#173
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#174
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Yes I sure do. It was his reactions and attitude. He's not an actor. I do find it pretty interesting that your whole purpose here is to prove that online poker is not rigged. When someone agrees with your conclusions but not your methods of arriving athose conclusions you don't seem to like it. I realize you probably put a lot of time into this and that may color your responses but you might want to consider asking a few questions before jumping down someone's throat. If you had you might have found out where I was coming from before you made the above comments. |
|
#175
|
||||
|
||||