AA & AK, allin experiment

[partz]

That sounds like a bingo game not poker. Practice and studying definitely can improve to anyones game.

 

[boyward]

Yeah, sadly bad beats happen and it's easy to jump onto the 'rigged' or 'fix' conclusion poker isn't about waiting for monsters and going all-in. Sure there's a time and a place for that. I am pretty sure I have lost the majority of my AA hands - some due to bad play, some due to bad luck. If you don't trust a site find a site you do trust or take these stats into account to modify your play. Agree with others that a larger statistical size is warranted but what's the end game any way? Once you are all-in the risk is there.

 

[ADRI7HO]

But you did not even tell us how many callers you had. Cause if there were more then 1 then stats are really okay.
And after all AA KK is not the same as AK.
Also like folks already said - 30 hands is not enough.
Do it for at least a thousand heands and show more info - the callers, the hands and all the other stuff.
Do a proper investigation if you wana accuse poker room of cheating the RNG.

I totally agree with that. It takes a lot more hands to get more accurate statistics. The result after 1000 hands would interest me as well. :albertein
With a smaller immersion, by the way, the probability really doesn’t seem to be correct. :hmmmm:

 

[Natta777]

I trust pokerstars. Perhaps my opinion will change in the future. But today it is.

 

[lukovnikofff]

I also agree with most of the comments, you played very few hands in order to draw conclusions! For such experiments, I think you need at least 3000-4000 hands! Good luck at the tables!

 

[Baldy86]

the hand number is too small

but it is still rigged of course imo . i dont trust it either

 

[AizenFalck]

There is something called sample size in statistics, if your sample is small it tends to give you wrong results, you have to deal with a much larger sample to give data that are close to the true percentages of correctness, for example, in the In the case of hands in Poker, the odds are so high and so many things to take into account that a sample of even a thousand hands would be very little and would give us little information. Greetings.

 

[Mariadelaluz]

It needs to check more times to decide.

 

[StealTheButton]

If I flip a coin 20 times and it lands on head 14 times, is the coin broken? Am I not flipping correctly? That's 70% that can't be right huh? Now what if I flipped that coin 20,000 times and it landed on heads 14,000 times. Is that a different story?

 

[TheNutz4You]

AA and KK is only 1 pair, AK is nothing but Ace high. Sorry you lost, it's not rigged against you .

 

[scubed]

What are your thoughts?

A LOT more hands are required for the variance to present itself correctly AND the opponents cards are all different so you'll need to account for the Win% expected against each type of hand.

 

[pokerdebit]

A LOT more hands are required for the variance to present itself correctly AND the opponents cards are all different so you'll need to account for the Win% expected against each type of hand.

I took all the hands
Run percentage of winning at the preflop (excluding loss and draw percentage)
And made an average overall
And it was not matching the total wins vs total loss and total draws

 

[pokerdebit]

I think every one should know that you do not need millions of hands to make conclusions
Especially when the odds are very much in your favor

Yes obviously, the smaller amount of hands tested the larger the error or less accurate
But the higher your chance of winning (the outcome you are looking at) the greater the accuracy

 

[pokerdebit]

Also I did the test based on speculation
After playing nearly every day for more than 3 years
Me test proved me right

I did the test for medium buy-ins, like 11 usd buy-in
So not a test where there is a of fishes shooting like crazy
Even in the latter case, my winnings should be more

I will continue do these test on my hands
Especially all ins
When I have a larger amount of results, I will share it
Because clarity and honesty must be addressed
Fairness must be managed these sites which claims to do so

I studied texas poker a lot
And was suprised what my overall outcomes were
Not to expecting calculations

 

[jesusali1]

You are right according to the statistics the amount of losses should be less than the amount of wins, so you could say that the variance in this poker room is more variable.

 

[Lucky River]

With AK I lose about 50% of the time, with AA about 30% of the time. And that's okay. If we play 1 on 1, the more players go into the hand, the less our chances of winning.

 

[MAGICUZ]

It's not about pokerstars, you're just out of luck.I also have no luck like everyone else, but this is rare.AA-KK is a strong hand, but AK is not a hand that often wins)

 

[Zirkzee]

Since only 16 hands were called, you can hardly make a statement. The variance in poker is high. With AA or KK you are only 80:20 ahead of any other pair. After all, you lose every fifth time. So AA or KK are not unbeatable. Especially when several players call. With 4 opponents, the win rate with AA is no longer 50%. But if you had played a million hands, you would also see that you win as often as the odds predict.

 

[Pawlowski]

Not enough hands for this kind of analysis. Keep trying and taking notes, but I dont believe PS is cheating at all.

 

[recerveau]

Hi Guys & Gals,

I wonder, how much do you trust Pokerstars?
Because I dont. Let me explain:

I tried an experiment to only play AA, KK and AK and went allin everytime at tournaments
In total I played 33 hands over many tournaments
16 of those hands were called
And I only won 6 of hands
So I lost 10 hands
This is statistically wrong

I should be winning around 10 to 12 hands
But I in fact lost 10 hands
Its like the odds were opposite
Thats why I dont trust it
It should be banned everywhere with those statistics

What are your thoughts?

Thanks for responding

I don't really trust poker software either. But taking into account that you played a very low sample of hands, the results are very out of control.
But remember: luck still defines the champion, as strange as it may seem.

 

[rigor mortis]

Why is everybody surprised when their good hands are beaten and they figure that the game is rigged? Even AA is not guaranteed to win.
The small statistical size trying to prove the case is nonsense

 

[GARCIA PABLO DANIEL]

hello

It is a game of chance and it is online, it is handled by a machine. It is not human who deals the cards. It is obvious that with good hands you can lose more often than in real life. regards

 

[vnnby]

Small sample for such analysis. Your hands have good odds before the flop, but things can change after the flop.

 

[successlaw]

You have to try way more hands to test the math probabilities

 

[FoldemorHoldem]

i agree 100% 16 hands is far too little. would love to see the outcome though