Do you think the deck is randomly distributed?

[eyeluvpoker]

When you play live the 52 cards come out of the shuffler or are hand shuffled so you have a deck of cards. Nothing will change the order of what is dealt, flopped, turned and rivered once those cards are in the dealers hand. Online there are variable which determine which card is dealt so the 52 cards are not in a deck. Depending on action, time, etc. a random card is picked from the remaining cards and dealt. To me it sure seems like online poker is built to promote play. So many monster hands that you just don't see in Live play. Yes there are bad beats playing Live but not every other hand like some online sites. Regulated online poker is coming to PA. I can't wait and I hope it is truly 100% random.

 

[Salteballe]

I think it is. But lost happens the most times.

 

[Alex Sentsov]

I want to believe that. But sometimes it seems that everything is arranged. And naturally not in my favor ))

 

[Galmedic]

https://youtu.be/-DkHzOUzDjc

 

[eniseysmail]

Sometimes I don’t think that the deck in online poker is randomly shuffled. Well, this is of course only my opinion and is only considered online games.

 

[whitesmoke420]

it does feel at times like I'm totally being set up for a bad out haha I know I'm still learning a lot but being 1'upd by say KJ vs J9 and they river a 9 with J on the flop always bums me out ha but I'll get there. Doing better all the time.:icon_thum

 

[rubywesson]

Do you believe the deck is randomly distributed?

Yes ofcourse, poker sites and casinos would have 0 reason to rig games and risk prison

 

[curiplop]

On the day I think online poker cards are not dealt to the Tsar I stop playing instantly, I think they earn a lot with the rake, it is not necessary to favor someone

 

[ironduke11]

i think we have to accept that some degree of fixing is possible in onlne poker....
I buy into big games sometimes and first hand is aces or kings leading to an all in pre and I lose....
has happened too many times to be a coincidence
have seen scenarios which indicate a degree of fixing maybe in play

best thing to do is chip up fast and not be in the situations where you are spinning for your tournament life that often....

 

[Ovinetrix]

Live is sure, online I have my doubts.

 

[underdog140]

Don't forget that one can play allot more hands online then live. I believe the online deal is random but doesn't perfectly mirror a in hand dealt deck.

 

[vnnby]

Yes, but you can use Internet for seeking answer to this question or ask a question poker developers.

 

[Cesum Pec]

Yes ofcourse, poker sites and casinos would have 0 reason to rig games and risk prison

What?

That's like saying there is 0 reason to rob banks and risk prison. You and I would never think the risk worth the possible reward, but the world never seems to run out of stupid people willing to take that chance.

 

[rubywesson]

What?

That's like saying there is 0 reason to rob banks and risk prison. You and I would never think the risk worth the possible reward, but the world never seems to run out of stupid people willing to take that chance.

Casino gains % of a pot in rake, they have no edge they are not even playing the game what would they gain from swaying it for certain people to win

 

[bigpappa325]

Random enough i cant predict. How about you?

 

[Cesum Pec]

Casino gains % of a pot in rake, they have no edge they are not even playing the game what would they gain from swaying it for certain people to win

Follow the money. Where there is money, there are thieves. Wells Fargo is a huge US Bank with billions of dollars in annual profits and the bank and their employees found ways to cheat the system and customers to make even more money. I'm not saying any live or on-line game is cheating, but I find it absurd for someone to believe there is zero reason for anyone to cheat when there is money flowing left and right.

There have been cases of on-line poker cheats. Sure the site is making their cut, but if they could rig the software to have one hand in 1000 be a win for a house bot, no one would be the wiser and the house could be up millions of dollars over the course of a year. It could be a completely honest house but a software engineer programs some sort of back door to give him access to a cheat system. Banks have been robbed under a similar process. Again, I'm not saying it is happening or even likely to happen, but there is plenty of incentive for it to happen.

In live games, there have been reported cases of a dealer flashing cards to a player in the one seat. Does P1 call the all-in in the hopes he catches an out to win the pot? Only if the dealer shows him it is safe to do so. The dealer will never get away with that for long because the security cams will spot him sooner or later, but in a small, backwater poker room, could it happen if the house was in on it? Of course.

 

[thwenth1983]

I don't know where you got it, but it doesn't seem right. Don't you know of any poker customers who would change the program for the first 20 hands? You can have one leg to discuss the difference in player mentality between playing live and online. Otherwise, it's just another random thought in the random card generator plot.

Aren't you playing the first 20 hands and folding AA? How are the results different in live poker?
[/ Quote] Good evening everyone. Good evening everyone.
I will explain my reasoning, heads or tails, there is a 50% mathematical chance that you will win against your opponent's 50%, each time the coin is thrown, 50% each, no matter if you are alive or if you are playing a computer .
The AA hand is the best hand on the preflop deck, poker scholars, they reach the results of millions of poker hands, and will conclude that AA is the most profitable poker hand, for every $ 1 invested with AA you will receive a return of $ 2.78.
AA against the second best preflop KK hand, AA has an 80% chance of winning.
In live poker, this probability remains
If you take an Mtt and analyze the ten consecutive results, AA has won at least 8.
In online poker, this probability of AA is not the same, AA loses much more often, is it a scam? ? My answer no, this is computer software that needs programming to work, the problem that programming is giving very different results from the mathematical probability of poker.
Pokerstars is, in my opinion, the best poker site I play every day, what makes me upset are the results of unusual hands.
The bet365 poker site has hand results very similar to live poker, I hardly lose with AA or premium hands. Bet365's poker software programming is much more like real poker.
I will attach pictures of hands I played at bet365, note that all favorite preflop hands have won, in the last image there is a pokerstars hand, me with AcJc vs A2o, my hand is preflop favorite and contrary to mathematical odds, A2o win AJs.
You may ask me, can't an A2o beat AJs?
- Yes, the problem with pokerstars is that it happens with a high frequency, favorite hands win at bet365.

 

[MrPokerVerse]

I don't know where you got it, but it doesn't seem right. Don't you know of any poker customers who would change the program for the first 20 hands? You can have one leg to discuss the difference in player mentality between playing live and online. Otherwise, it's just another random thought in the random card generator plot.

Aren't you playing the first 20 hands and folding AA? How are the results different in live poker?
[/ Quote] Good evening everyone. Good evening everyone.
I will explain my reasoning, heads or tails, there is a 50% mathematical chance that you will win against your opponent's 50%, each time the coin is thrown, 50% each, no matter if you are alive or if you are playing a computer .
The AA hand is the best hand on the preflop deck, poker scholars, they reach the results of millions of poker hands, and will conclude that AA is the most profitable poker hand, for every $ 1 invested with AA you will receive a return of $ 2.78.
AA against the second best preflop KK hand, AA has an 80% chance of winning.
In live poker, this probability remains
If you take an Mtt and analyze the ten consecutive results, AA has won at least 8.
In online poker, this probability of AA is not the same, AA loses much more often, is it a scam? ? My answer no, this is computer software that needs programming to work, the problem that programming is giving very different results from the mathematical probability of poker.
Pokerstars is, in my opinion, the best poker site I play every day, what makes me upset are the results of unusual hands.
The bet365 poker site has hand results very similar to live poker, I hardly lose with AA or premium hands. Bet365's poker software programming is much more like real poker.
I will attach pictures of hands I played at bet365, note that all favorite preflop hands have won, in the last image there is a pokerstars hand, me with AcJc vs A2o, my hand is preflop favorite and contrary to mathematical odds, A2o win AJs.
You may ask me, can't an A2o beat AJs?
- Yes, the problem with pokerstars is that it happens with a high frequency, favorite hands win at bet365.

You are not taking a large enough hand history to come to the conclusion of AA vs any two HU. I have played on about 20 sites over 18 years and can run that hand it would be from 82 to 77 percent.

You can not contend that shuffling a deck is random and only because a “program” you don’t know the program code isn’t. You have based this on certain sites with no data but table observation. Claim is meaninglessness and is offering members new to the game false sense of reality. These are missing building blocks to offer people how tolearn the game.

 

[Cesum Pec]

You are not taking a large enough hand history to come to the conclusion of AA vs any two HU. ... You have based this on certain sites with no data but table observation. Claim is meaninglessness and is offering members new to the game false sense of reality.

Agreed. He is suffering from "Observation Bias." Without a few thousand AA vs Xy hand histories to compute a long term percentage of cracking, a few observations are meaningless. When your AA is beaten, many people feel butt hurt because they feel entitled to have won the hand. So they remember the losses much more so than they remember the expected wins.

AA is going to get cracked roughly 20% of the time. Against 72o, AA is still going to lose 15% of the time, so AA is hardly the guarantee of success that some players believe.

The odds of losing with AA twice in a row, all-in preflop vs one opponent is roughly 4%. That's roughly equivalent to hitting a two outer on the river. It doesn't happen often, but it happens.

 

[MrPokerVerse]

Agreed. He is suffering from "Observation Bias." Without a few thousand AA vs Xy hand histories to compute a long term percentage of cracking, a few observations are meaningless. When your AA is beaten, many people feel butt hurt because they feel entitled to have won the hand. So they remember the losses much more so than they remember the expected wins.

AA is going to get cracked roughly 20% of the time. Against 72o, AA is still going to lose 15% of the time, so AA is hardly the guarantee of success that some players believe.

The odds of losing with AA twice in a row, all-in preflop vs one opponent is roughly 4%. That's roughly equivalent to hitting a two outer on the river. It doesn't happen often, but it happens.

Good point, the stigma of the infallible AA.

 

[James_Harrison]

Not at all, i think it is distributed in a way where there are more juicy hands for rake or for bots or streamers / whoever they want. I believe its the same programming for cash games and you are going to see the same results in tournaments or whatever and the buyin doesn't effect it.

 

[James_Harrison]

One really confusing thing i see is requests for people to post data. So, people have gone out and gathered this data (large sample sizes hundreds of thousands of hands for example).

So, they post this and show the whole world that there was less than a 1% chance of such and such happening and them being a losing player over time. You cant ever find statistical proof that something is rigged because there would still be a one in a billion chance that this person could lose all of these hands over the large sample size.

People are posting the data now showing its rigged (bots and collusion is another topic). The data is being ignored.

 

[Frankie Potts]

Once the deck is shuffled, it is set, and the order in which the cards are dealt cannot be changed

 

[JJP]

On sites like pokerstars yes I believe the RNG is random

On sites like WPN and Chico not so much ...

 

[CallmeFloppy]

I believe that the cards come out randomly.
I say this despite I win less than 50% when I get all in preflop with pocket kings. My latest to a person that called with a 9 5 and hit a full house.