| Author |
Message |
ApolloSwanson
Pair
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 30
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Yeah I agree with craig |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CitizenCain
Three Pair
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: Behind a huge stack of chips.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| craigo6x wrote: |
| There is also a difference between rigged and flawed. While I do not think online poker is rigged, I certainly think the RNG is flawed. |
Uh, the "flaw" in a good computerized RNG only generates a detectable pattern over billions (or is it trillions now?) of iterations, and even then it requires damn good computer software (based heavily in abstract math theory) to find it.
You're suffering from selective memory, and online "randomness" is no worse than live randomness, no matter what your brain's telling you. In fact, online randomness is probably better, because an online deck never suffers from a retard who doesn't know how to shuffle properly.
Maybe you see more set vs set battles online because no one's capable of folding any PP online, where as live, that 44 maybe isn't worth 30 BBs? Hmmm? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
craigo6x
Mr. Met
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 4145
Location: Cursing the relievers in the bullpen
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CitizenCain wrote: |
| craigo6x wrote: |
| There is also a difference between rigged and flawed. While I do not think online poker is rigged, I certainly think the RNG is flawed. |
Uh, the "flaw" in a good computerized RNG only generates a detectable pattern over billions (or is it trillions now?) of iterations, and even then it requires damn good computer software (based heavily in abstract math theory) to find it.
You're suffering from selective memory, and online "randomness" is no worse than live randomness, no matter what your brain's telling you. In fact, online randomness is probably better, because an online deck never suffers from a retard who doesn't know how to shuffle properly.
Maybe you see more set vs set battles online because no one's capable of folding any PP online, where as live, that 44 maybe isn't worth 30 BBs? Hmmm? |
Uh, maybe there is a flaw. I don't play billions or trillions of iterations. I play two hundred a night. The fact is the randomness of those trillions of iterations should manifest itself in the small sampling I observe.
I also play live once a week. Those same iterations should manifest themselves in live play. They don't. I've been in set over set. I've been in flush over flush. I've been in Full house over full house or better quads over full house. The frequency with which it happens online is mind boggling compared to live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CitizenCain
Three Pair
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: Behind a huge stack of chips.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How's that old adage go? Never argue with an idiot... because no one will be able to tell the difference...
You're right, online poker is flawed and is ripping you off out of your money. So you continue to play at a rigged or "flawed" game you can't win because... you hate having money? You're a dumbass? You're a gambling addict? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jobe Gilchrist
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 3446
Location: "the most commonly-uttered phrase by vampire bats is 'it's not as cool as it sounds'"
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Did he really just say that "the fact is" that randomness that only a computer could find over a trillion iterations should manifest itself during his hundred-hand online sessions?
These are the people that call me a pseudo-intellectual. That's a "fact", too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kardsh4rk
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 1279
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow ... here's some really impressive statistics: 165 people (at time of this posting) have read this post, 16 people replied and not one flame. Zero, zilch, nada! Thanks 
To respond to a few posters, I do know our brains look for patterns. I do know that sometimes patterns we seek (and think we find) are just our brain smashing snippets into a pattern for us. And yes, I'm remembering ALL the hands - not just the good ones or the bad ones. As I said, on Day X, I'll catch good cards as much as bad ones ... on day Y, it's mostly rags. I'm not selectively choosing hands over the other ... i'm scrolling through my HH's and stating what is smack-dab obvious to me ... when the HH says 'crap, crap, crap, crap, A10suited, crap, crap, crap, crap etc. ... I don't really think I'm being selective)
My question is: How random is it really? To say 'completely random' isn't good enough. You have 52 cards in a deck. 9 Players at a table. All players receive 2 cards (18 dealt) and providing it is played to the river, 5 more show, for a total of 23 cards showing. Shuffled up, what are the odds of the same person catching the exact same cards again? (I'm asking ... because I don't know). Repeat the whole process, and the same player catches the same cards again. What are the odds of that now?
If someone is a math genius (I'm not) .. could you enlighten us? Because, if the odds are like 1/100 ... fine. If the odds are 1/100,000,000,000 ... then, I gotta ask ... how random is it really - when this seems to happen to more than a couple of players? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jobe Gilchrist
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 3446
Location: "the most commonly-uttered phrase by vampire bats is 'it's not as cool as it sounds'"
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kard, it still sounds like you're thinking you can out-think pattern recognition, and that "interesting" events are somehow an example of a flaw in the randomness. Why would the flaw also be something "interesting", like giving the same person the same hole cards too often? This all screams of false pattern recognition.
Keep in mind that, to be really backing other people's accounts of "weird behavior", you're giving them a lot of credit, when it's usually just random "rigged!" screamers with < 10 posts making the claims. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CitizenCain
Three Pair
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: Behind a huge stack of chips.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Depnds how you calculate it. I'll use the method I like, which says that the odds of getting the same hand back to back are (1/52*1/51 = ~0.4%). But that's the same probability as getting ANY two hands back to back.
It's like how you never see 1-2-3-4-5-6 win those massive powerball lotto jackpots - but the odds of it winning is the same as the unmemorable, seemingly patternless combinations you see winning the lotto every time. Doesn't mean rigged or flawed, it just means that there's a disparity in what your brain considers memorable and what long run statistics tell us.
I could tell you crazy stories about my live home game that would convince you that game's rigged - but it's not, and the 1 in a million happenings I remember are no differnt than the 1 in a million happenings I don't remember.
Sure, I remember the stud hi/lo hand where I caught 4 perfect cards to make a wheel straight flush (and a massive pot), but I don't remember the hand where I caught (in this exact order) a 3 of clubs, a Queen of spades, a 7 of spades and a 2 of hearts!!!! ZOMG!
Both events are equally unlikely statistically, but no one remembers the highly unlikely events that don't correspond to any memorable hand or card combination. Just the equally unlikely events tha do correspond to a memorable hand or card combination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
craigo6x
Mr. Met
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 4145
Location: Cursing the relievers in the bullpen
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CitizenCain wrote: |
How's that old adage go? Never argue with an idiot... because no one will be able to tell the difference...
You're right, online poker is flawed and is ripping you off out of your money. So you continue to play at a rigged or "flawed" game you can't win because... you hate having money? You're a dumbass? You're a gambling addict? |
That's a good point Cain-so i won't argue with you. Wouldn't want to argue with an idiot.
Fact is, I am a winning player online, and a winning player live, but I play $5 dollar stakes online, and $100 tourney's live, and that is because of the "flaw" that i perceive being the RNG is not so R. Is it because someone can't fold 55 to a raise and a reraise? maybe. is it because someone can't fold 4s7s to a 5x BB raise? maybe. Is it because the RNG isn't so R? maybe. Thats all I'm saying.
And Jobe. GFY, ESAD and FOAD you twunt. If I wanted your opinion, I'd beat it out of you. I only wish they printed your posts on tissue paper so I could wipe my *** with them as that is what they are good for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CitizenCain
Three Pair
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: Behind a huge stack of chips.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| craigo6x wrote: |
Fact is, I am a winning player online, and a winning player live, but I play $5 dollar stakes online, and $100 tourney's live, and that is because of the "flaw" that i perceive being the RNG is not so R. |
Oh, so then you admit that you cheat people out of their money? Taking advantage of a flawed system?
You're the worst kind of scum. People who use computer code to cheat other people out their money should be killed. I hope that one day you run into one of the people you ripped off online so they can give you the beating you deserve. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
craigo6x
Mr. Met
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 4145
Location: Cursing the relievers in the bullpen
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CitizenCain wrote: |
| craigo6x wrote: |
Fact is, I am a winning player online, and a winning player live, but I play $5 dollar stakes online, and $100 tourney's live, and that is because of the "flaw" that i perceive being the RNG is not so R. |
Oh, so then you admit that you cheat people out of their money? Taking advantage of a flawed system?
You're the worst kind of scum. People who use computer code to cheat other people out their money should be killed. I hope that one day you run into one of the people you ripped off online so they can give you the beating you deserve. |
You happen to be a bigger twunt than Jobe, and I didn't think that was possible. What's wrong, somebody calls you an idiot and you can't take it. Waah, the big bad poster called me an idiot so I'll call him scum. Did your mom have any children that lived?
Everyone that posts here plays online. Now if you want to call me a cheater behind the security of your keyboard and monitor thats fine you POS dog turd ahole, but anytime you'd like to get together for a little one on one discussion about my ethics and honesty, I'd be more than happy to have a fist...I mean face to face with you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jobe Gilchrist
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 3446
Location: "the most commonly-uttered phrase by vampire bats is 'it's not as cool as it sounds'"
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| We prefer people actually back up calling someone an idiot by pointing out how they're wrong or otherwise saying something intelligent. You might want to set those things as goals for yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CitizenCain
Three Pair
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: Behind a huge stack of chips.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| craigo6x wrote: |
| You happen to be a bigger twunt than Jobe, and I didn't think that was possible. What's wrong, somebody calls you an idiot and you can't take it. Waah, the big bad poster called me an idiot so I'll call him scum. Did your mom have any children that lived? |
Don't get mad at me because YOU admitted to cheating people out of their money using a flawed online system. Stealing people's money from over the internet - what cowardly scum that makes you. Why don't you get a real job, do some honest work, and stop using internet trickery to cheat people out of their money?
You disgust me.
| craigo6x wrote: |
| Everyone that posts here plays online. Now if you want to call me a cheater behind the security of your keyboard and monitor thats fine you POS dog turd ahole, but anytime you'd like to get together for a little one on one discussion about my ethics and honesty, I'd be more than happy to have a fist...I mean face to face with you. |
Aww, is da big bad man who has to hide behind his keyboard to rob people going to beat me up?
Oh noes!!! I'm so scared.
Get clue. Only retards threaten to beat other people up over the net. If you wanna be a real man about it, drive to Columbus and I'll meet you at my friendly neighborhood bar. It's been a while since we've all shared a good laugh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
craigo6x
Mr. Met
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 4145
Location: Cursing the relievers in the bullpen
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jobe Gilchrist wrote: |
| We prefer people actually back up calling someone an idiot by pointing out how they're wrong or otherwise saying something intelligent. You might want to set those things as goals for yourself. |
You might want to stay out of conversations that don't concern you in the first place. I stated I perceived the system as flawed. I didn't say it is flawed, I said "I think it is flawed..." That is a statement of perception, not fact. For that I was called an idiot. I then explained my online experience of about 200 hands per night. Thats 1200 a week (discounting saturday) That's More than 60,000 hands per year. I would think thats a fair amount of hands, but then you jump in like the douchenozzle you are with your two cents.
Its hard to fight battles of wit unarmed Jobe. You might want to consider that before you post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CitizenCain
Three Pair
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2474
Location: Behind a huge stack of chips.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| craigo6x wrote: |
| You might want to stay out of conversations that don't concern you in the first place. I stated I perceived the system as flawed. I didn't say it is flawed, I said "I think it is flawed..." That is a statement of perception, not fact. For that I was called an idiot. |
"I think you're an idiot."
Sweet, it's a statement of perception, so we're all cool and no one can get mad.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB Copyright 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
