SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
If it we're just occasionally it's wouldn't be viewed as suspicious. It seems to be the norm rather than the exception.
puzzlefish
student of the donk arts
Loyaler
This is the typical thread for these kinds of topics. One side cries about unusually bad luck while the other side mocks them. Most of the pro-RNG side assume that bad players complain about rigging because they have selective memory and only focus on the short run. This is true to some extent. There is also the belief that if rigging is taking place, then there must be some way to prove or consistently exploit it, such as consistently winning (like the superuser scams of the past). This is not necessarily the case. The RNG of a site can operate in many non-random ways that are only semi-predictable. There can be patterns in card dealing that can be exploited to avoid bad beats (if these situations are carefully defined) but not necessarily consistently reliable to guarantee the good beats or suckouts.
I think what is in focus here is the definition of variance and whether some kind of organized programming can be (or is) concealed within what is believed to be the concept of variance, whether it is on ACR or any other online site. If it is happening, I do not believe it can ever be proved.
I think what is in focus here is the definition of variance and whether some kind of organized programming can be (or is) concealed within what is believed to be the concept of variance, whether it is on ACR or any other online site. If it is happening, I do not believe it can ever be proved.
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
Hopefully this isn't coming off as crying about a situation or hand? I'm curious as to why you don't think it could never be proven and if it was happening why couldn't it be exploited?
I also completely agree that there is some randomness at times and that something triggers these actions. However it's seems like at least ACR specifically seems to be in this mode more often than not?
I also understand the RNG sides argument that memory is selective when it comes to these hands, or remembering the hands you loose as a favorite way more than the ones you win. ( Usually because you expected to win them to begin with because you had the best hand moving in to start with)
But even with all that being said I can't shake the feeling there's something really funky going on there and that others have already unraveled the thread or got a really good start on it if not?
Playing in our $100 freeroll tonight for example. ( I wish I'd caught his name but I was distracted) about an hour in to the tournament I'm delt Queens in late postion and UTG or +1 shoves 21/22 hundred all in everyone else folds and I make the call. They turn over 7/8 of diamonds?
Now in a freeroll or even early in a small buy-in tournament you see this all the time. But today was Tuesday this was in the Cards Chat FR an hour deep in the tournament? There wasn't any other raise to prompt this shove the blinds were still 50/100 or 100/200 so he wasn't super short stacked. He obviously doesn't raise like that with that type of hand Everytime he has it or he would have been busted out already ( or had a much larger stack if he were in what I've started calling a "lucky seat") so what prompted that action?
He flopped two pair and I didn't improve. Hell I'll even buy that it was intuition. The problem is this shit happens there all the time and usually the people doing it Yahtzee bingo the flop! By all the time I literally mean I have it happen to me several times a day with even worse hands stuff like K/5 and J/6 offsuit that there is absolutely not any reason to play in that position let alone shove with preflop?
Which raises the question do they know something I don't? Obviously they are still in the tournament what they're doing is working I guess ( until the miscalculated or guessed wrong about the texture of the upcoming board) So they either have figured something out, they believe they can see the future, or I'm the most unlucky son of a bitch on the face of the Earth. If I played the same situation 1000 times I'd call every time and probably win 650+ but again why did they do it to start with? Why risk your entire event on a guess when you could have gotten a look at the board first way cheaper? He's not trying to steal in that spot with the entire table behind him to act still? It makes no sense unless they know something everyone else doesn't? It happens way too often in far too many different situations for it to all be coincidence too. So what am I missing?
puzzlefish
student of the donk arts
Loyaler
The standard of proof to distinguish a quasi-random rig from background randomness will require millions upon millions of hands, which ultimately will not tell you anything because mathematically everything balances out to be within the norms of statistically acceptable ranges of probability. Unless you have a unique idea on how to test for such a rig and to conclusively show it within a smaller sample of hands, you're in for a frustrating time.
On a side note, did you know that the cards most likely to crack aces, kings, queens, and jacks (beside obvious higher pairs) are suited lower connectors?
On a side note, did you know that the cards most likely to crack aces, kings, queens, and jacks (beside obvious higher pairs) are suited lower connectors?
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
I actually did know that. I also still am completely bewildered as to why someone would randomly shove their stack away at random with them at random? Which I'll admit worked out really well for them in this specific instance. Ultimately it's their cards to play as they wish but I'd love to know the reason behind it?
Shady Slim
Legend
Silver Level
It was one example, not 100 or 1000. Just one. People tend to remember badly played hands and not the other 99 they sucked out on.
There you have it. Prove it. Start tracking all of your hands and then come back to us with some statistics that can be analyzed.
One thing I noticed in your OP was that you failed to mention how the the other two players were allowed to see the flop in the first place. Did you let them limp in? Did you raise 4 or 5 BBs, but blinds were only at 60 at the time? Was this a $10 OnDemand game, in which case you can throw all of you poker theory out the window? And why would you shove all in with just top pair?
Here is a novel idea and I got it from one of your posts about how to reverse-engineer stuff. Start tracking all of your hands that went to the river. After about a hundred hands, let us know how many you sucked out on. If it is over 20% then maybe you might be on to something. If not, then you will have your answer -- RNG is good enough.
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
This was in the 3rd tier or step of the Venom I believe? I had raised 6× the blind preflop and had these two callers. I didn't shove all in one player bet then the other shoved all in leaving me to call or fold.
I think somewhere in all off this the point of the post has been lost in the mix?
The point of the post was not to analyze the hand, or to critique the way the hand was played. I also certainly wasn't posting to cry, complain, piss and moan about a suck out or losing the hand.
The point of the post was simply to:
Determine if others were noticing these oddly specific details while playing in similar situations at this site.
Hopefully share any relevant information that could be used by all of us if any similar events were happening?
Hopefully put some more pieces of the puzzle together if it can be determined that there is in fact a puzzle?
The key points of reference from the OP should have been and we're ment to be:
Three players continue on to see the flop, all three players hit the flop hard (really hard) before you are even able to ACT you have a pot sized bet and a raise all in in front of you.
Your holdings are Top pair great kicker nut flush draw is this a trap hand that your going to lose Everytime? How often in a session do you see this same scenario play out?
Because I see this happen often and it seems to me that the majority of the time the person holding the best of it on the flop loses the hand?
I was actually hoping to get some feedback of players noticing the same types of situations happening to them far more often than it should?
It's kind of sad that it seems everyone is auto programmed to analyze and critique while criticizing the play and actions rather than observing a new way to have additional information going into these situations potentially?
So much for thinking outside the box?
A
aj88xa869
Rock Star
Silver Level
Hey would you mind sharing what guide that was? I could use some good info on cash tables and SNG
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
Thanks for you input that's a pretty broad strokes you are painting there though? Just because I'm curious to see if anyone else's experience aligns with mine and the possibility that there might be something screwy going on has been brought up I must be new to the game or a shitty player?
I guess all Chinese people are good at math and all black people look the same to you too?
I'll just keep my observations and thoughts to myself from here on out.
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
Here is latest observation to consider? This is based off a 18 hand consecutive observation that is flop specific for this type of hand.
I've been watching this for awhile now and it doesn't come around a whole lot. But what I'm looking at is the monster draw top pair flops. Only reference in this is ACR.
The last 18 times I've had this type of hand it's gone blank blank on turn and River. Which I find even more odd as the number of potential outs is so large?
Here is one example of what I'm talking about:
Holding A/K clubs
Flop 10C, AS, JC
So top pair top kicker gutshot nutflush draw.
Turn 4D
River 2hearts
Or recently
Holding
10h,8h "big blind no raise"
Flop 9h,7h, 10d
Turn
KS
River 3clubs
In all these instances I either was raised all in and called or lost the hand playing small ball after I caught on to what was happening.
I believe this is a cooler that is a generator programmed out put as I found it comes after a large win and as of yet has been a winner? Anyone else experience the same?
It's to the point where I feel like I should just fold on the flop when this happens but it's really hard to convince myself that it's the correct play?
Just looking for input from anyone who might have seen the same type of reoccurring situation?
I've been watching this for awhile now and it doesn't come around a whole lot. But what I'm looking at is the monster draw top pair flops. Only reference in this is ACR.
The last 18 times I've had this type of hand it's gone blank blank on turn and River. Which I find even more odd as the number of potential outs is so large?
Here is one example of what I'm talking about:
Holding A/K clubs
Flop 10C, AS, JC
So top pair top kicker gutshot nutflush draw.
Turn 4D
River 2hearts
Or recently
Holding
10h,8h "big blind no raise"
Flop 9h,7h, 10d
Turn
KS
River 3clubs
In all these instances I either was raised all in and called or lost the hand playing small ball after I caught on to what was happening.
I believe this is a cooler that is a generator programmed out put as I found it comes after a large win and as of yet has been a winner? Anyone else experience the same?
It's to the point where I feel like I should just fold on the flop when this happens but it's really hard to convince myself that it's the correct play?
Just looking for input from anyone who might have seen the same type of reoccurring situation?
Chief talking bull
Visionary
Bronze Level
online poker is like the wild,wild west. They're just loose with their play. As for a bad beat the one that has been bothering me the most was in a live game when I had aces all-in preflop against A 9 suited and he turned, rivered a flush on me that knocked me out on the bubble. Poker happens.
puzzlefish
student of the donk arts
Loyaler
You are on the right track. Now start tracking hands where someone hits a straight and compare them against one another. You will find the first instance of an "edge case".
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
I'm beginning to think your thoughts on these and mine aligned to a degree by all means continue to share I'd be I Interested in any ideas
A
All Rise
Rock Star
Silver Level
I am sure we have all felt at one point or another that online poker was rigged, myself included. But the older and wiser I get, I shrug it off. In most spots we want those callers,does it seem that runner,runner or 2 outers hit often....Yes. But in the long run solid poker pays,in my opinion anyway.
VMVarga
Rock Star
Silver Level
RNG's are not totally random, but the ones running on poker sites should be sufficiently random, far beyond any doubts about whether or not its all rigged up in the way that the "rigged" group believes it is. Because they are not totally random, they need to be checked and monitored by an independent third party--its a "who watches the watchmen" kind of thing. poker stars does this, yet people still complain about it being totally rigged. Bovada does NOT do this, so there is a little more room for those people to claim something fishy is going on--not to mention that controversial case study.
An edge case is a problem or situation that occurs in the function of a system or machine during its most extreme parameters, at either the minimum or maximum range or settings of operation, known as boundary conditions. In computer software programming, they use unit tests to see if there is an edge case problem that needs to be addressed. In online poker, the unit test checks the boundary conditions of the RNG algorithms. They check for a series of edge cases at these boundaries, the idea being that if the system can function and operate okay at the boundaries then it should be okay functioning within the min and max.
Edge casing is very difficult to do, and it gets even harder (maybe impossible) if you do not have access to the RNG code, either to break it down through in depth analysis to find the edge cases or to modify existing code/insert new lines. If you want to know more about how it works, read the case study or read up on statistics and edge casing.
I have 8182 hands in my hand history. I don't have Poker Tracker right now, but for those that do, they can easily see pretty much every single hand they ever played online. If you really think there is something fishy going on with ACR's RNG, why not do the research yourself and take a look at the data from your own hand history. I would bet a lot of money that you will not find any evidence of anything fishy going on.
You could go in there and find as many of the AA, KK, and QQ hands that you had, and write down the equity you had going in, how your equity changed through the streets, and the final outcome at showdown. Create a spread sheet of all these hands and compare the number of times you got it in good and won to the number of times you got it in good and lost. I suspect that even with a low sample size of about 100, you will have had more of those hands won than lost.
To me, it just seems like the OP is angry and upset that he doesn't get 5 heads and 5 tails on each occasion that he flips a quarter ten times. And I will say it again: Just because the odds of flipping a coin and getting heads or tails are 50/50, it does not mean that you will always get half head and half tails when flipping the coin a set number of times. Also, when you drive down the sample size of the experiment, like only flipping a coin twice or only looking at one hand of NLHE, those given odds become almost meaningless; they are not given odds for each and every single experiment executed, they are given odds over the totality of experimentation (confidence in the given odds grows in pace with the sample size). Its all just statistics and math, and at some point you have to realize that you are just sitting there arguing that 2+2 may not equal 4.
An edge case is a problem or situation that occurs in the function of a system or machine during its most extreme parameters, at either the minimum or maximum range or settings of operation, known as boundary conditions. In computer software programming, they use unit tests to see if there is an edge case problem that needs to be addressed. In online poker, the unit test checks the boundary conditions of the RNG algorithms. They check for a series of edge cases at these boundaries, the idea being that if the system can function and operate okay at the boundaries then it should be okay functioning within the min and max.
Edge casing is very difficult to do, and it gets even harder (maybe impossible) if you do not have access to the RNG code, either to break it down through in depth analysis to find the edge cases or to modify existing code/insert new lines. If you want to know more about how it works, read the case study or read up on statistics and edge casing.
I have 8182 hands in my hand history. I don't have Poker Tracker right now, but for those that do, they can easily see pretty much every single hand they ever played online. If you really think there is something fishy going on with ACR's RNG, why not do the research yourself and take a look at the data from your own hand history. I would bet a lot of money that you will not find any evidence of anything fishy going on.
You could go in there and find as many of the AA, KK, and QQ hands that you had, and write down the equity you had going in, how your equity changed through the streets, and the final outcome at showdown. Create a spread sheet of all these hands and compare the number of times you got it in good and won to the number of times you got it in good and lost. I suspect that even with a low sample size of about 100, you will have had more of those hands won than lost.
To me, it just seems like the OP is angry and upset that he doesn't get 5 heads and 5 tails on each occasion that he flips a quarter ten times. And I will say it again: Just because the odds of flipping a coin and getting heads or tails are 50/50, it does not mean that you will always get half head and half tails when flipping the coin a set number of times. Also, when you drive down the sample size of the experiment, like only flipping a coin twice or only looking at one hand of NLHE, those given odds become almost meaningless; they are not given odds for each and every single experiment executed, they are given odds over the totality of experimentation (confidence in the given odds grows in pace with the sample size). Its all just statistics and math, and at some point you have to realize that you are just sitting there arguing that 2+2 may not equal 4.
SouthparkSith
Visionary
Silver Level
I am the OP and I'm not angry at all. I'm also hoping to keep this from turning into a "rigged" thread? Most recently I'm simply stating an observation off a dozen and a half hands that have a very similar pocket holding, flopped board, and what I think is odd outcome?
Maybe I'm wrong it wouldn't be the first time in the last 5 minutes. But think about it.
If you're holding suited big slick "this case clubs" and your flop comes Ace of spades ten of clubs queen of clubs "or jack" so your holding top pair top kicker a gutshot, the nut flush draw and a gut shot royal flush draw. Would you believe you were ahead in the hand? If one of your opponents had flopped the straight? " Which more than likely they did as those are cards people fall in love with even to a larger raise" would you not still think with all the outs your probably still the favorite or at worst 40/60 to win the hand? It's a hard spot to lay down this kind of hand in especially when you have some nimrod shoves all in and two more call? Now your getting 3/1 and have to believe you have the strongest draw? Or worst you definitely have outs at this point?
The point is consistently "18 straight and counting" your hand is no good and your draw doesn't get there. Which I think in it's self is odd as you have a lot of outs to potentially hit.
The majority of these hands your ahead when you call and one of these others bingos on the river with something stupid that it makes no sense to be in the hand with?
Like 5/3 off suit and they catch a 2 on the turn and a 4 on the river? For a wheel or they called off all thier chips with pocket fours you don't improve and they river a set?
I just wonder if I'm the only one seeing this happening to them? Or if I'm not I'm looking for those others to breakdown their experiences to look for similarities? I've about got myself convinced that if I hit the flop stupid hard like that to fold because I'm ultimately going to lose the hand and my stack if I don't? I'm talking specifically about those hands where you flop top pair, some kind of straight flush draw and obviously a straight draw.
Or even this? Has anyone flopped a hand like this and hit thier best possible out after the fact? Not runner runner either but flopped four to a straight flush been shoved all in on then hit the straight flush on the turn or river? I simply have yet to win one of these hands and have been the huge favorite on the flop most of the time? A couple times I was behind once to a flopped straight once to a set. But in both those instances that hand didn't win the pot either?
J
John bruce
Legend
Silver Level
Tbh I dont play that much in ACR. Is it every single flop an action flop realy? I bet everything I have that this is an overgeneralised statement.
And to answer to your question about rigged action hands in tournaments. Poker sites makes money through rake. If we were talking about action hands in cash games were there is rake in every pot that would be a completely different thing. But in tourneys the rake is getting paid by the buyin. I can understand cash game hands but why on earth a poker site would want to rig a tourney????
Ps. Are we really comparing live to online tourneys from a time perspective? The same hand would take a lot more for live to be played compared to online for obvious reasons.
You really think they would use different programming from cash to tourney. That would be something easly to notice. Besides you want the same thing action. Cash games would generate max rake and tourneys you knock people out faster to get into another one. Really a no brainer.
puzzlefish
student of the donk arts
Loyaler
Why does the site have to necessarily have something to do with their RNG? Is this part of the site not at least partially contracted out? Do you think the designers of the RNG do not have an alterior motive to hide a means of exploiting their RNG for their families and friends? Or do you think each poker site hires its own employees just to design the RNG? Time to start thinking beyond one dimension.
J
John bruce
Legend
Silver Level
River kill
I must say one thing first. I love to play poker. Even if I believe that online poker isn't at all real it is consistent. Most people lose at poker so they don't question anything. There programmed. You could give them any situation and within 25 million hands it would work itself out.
Poker is truly a game that you can't monitor all the hands like they do on tv. So you really don't know all the other cards that's been folded. Sometimes making the odds even greater in your favor. But there are to too many variables making it impossible to predict. So how in the world could you ever prove it's rigged? You can't unless someone comes out and claims they programmed it.
Even then there would be a spin campaign and you would be right back to square one.
So except that the river card produces an enormous amount of suck outs and play for entertainment. Most entertainment cost money so we are at a advantage getting free rolls. Also think how much more challenging is is to win if it is rigged. That would be rewarding when you win.Try and have fun. Let's play poker:top:
I must say one thing first. I love to play poker. Even if I believe that online poker isn't at all real it is consistent. Most people lose at poker so they don't question anything. There programmed. You could give them any situation and within 25 million hands it would work itself out.
Poker is truly a game that you can't monitor all the hands like they do on tv. So you really don't know all the other cards that's been folded. Sometimes making the odds even greater in your favor. But there are to too many variables making it impossible to predict. So how in the world could you ever prove it's rigged? You can't unless someone comes out and claims they programmed it.
Even then there would be a spin campaign and you would be right back to square one.
So except that the river card produces an enormous amount of suck outs and play for entertainment. Most entertainment cost money so we are at a advantage getting free rolls. Also think how much more challenging is is to win if it is rigged. That would be rewarding when you win.Try and have fun. Let's play poker:top: