Online Poker Forum - Patterns ... and the flaws of Code

deadmoney314 · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:04 am Post subject:

Craig you are relentlessly idiotic (or at least you come off that way). People like you never provide us with your PT database to show the statistical anomalies let alone provide us with sufficient proof that you have the experience to play 100,000+ hands (without going broke). Good luck with that.

Kardsh4rk · Message Board Junkie Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 1279

AlexScottUK · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:08 am Post subject:

Kardsh4rk · Message Board Junkie Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 1279

deadmoney314 · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:40 am Post subject:

You've obviously never heard of Occum's Razor, not that it is a golden rule but a perfect application can be applied to your assertions. Whatever is a simpler explanation (FTP is not rigged) tends to be true. This is backed up by the fact that no one has reported large data sets of HH from FTP (or any other major site) with notable differences from expected distributions of hole cards, flop turns & rivers.
The notion that one player can sort through a couple hundred hands manually and pick up something is mentally retarded. I want to stress that, --it is mentally retarded-- Hope that helps, and come back to us when you have ~ 500,000 hands and we can talk (no begging for money as you go broke though)

griffinlord · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:49 am Post subject:

As I thought about the RNGs this morning I decided that a flawed RNG could not result from mere incompetence but would require some supremely high (low?) level of incompetence that I find difficult to believe could exist. Even the prepackaged RNGs that come with your programming language are going to be better than high end RNGs that were used, successfully, for serious work a couple of decades ago. I find it impossible to believe anything worst than the prepackaged RNG could result because of incompetence.

This leaves only two choices: rigged or not rigged.

I do conceed corruption could exist. That's why the majority of us choose to play on sites that provide at least some evidence that they are not corrupt either through affiliation with people we believe to be reputable (e.g., Doyle, FT Pros) or through longevity (e.g., pokerstars).

However given what I know about behavior and randomness I firmly believe that the best rigging is true randomness. Which leads us right back to incompetence---only the incompetent would use rigging because ultimately it would lead to a lower return on investment. (Restarting rigged sites over and over costs time and money relative to simply keeping an honest site up and running.)

But then criminals are often focused on the short-term rather than the long-term. The Enron gang could have made tons of money keeping it legal. It would have taken longer, but they wouldn't have lost it in the end.

Given that a successful poker pro has to be focused on making plays that are correct in the long-run I am comfortable that they will run their sites for long-term gain rather than short-term.

It is also not clear to me how you rig things to maximize rake in the short-term that is better than just randomly dealing cards. I've heard the allegation that "action flops" increase the rake. But a fairly quick thought experiment falsifies that conclusion.

In cash games more hands = more rake plain and simple. Action flops lead to the busting out of players and therefore fewer hands. I was playing heads up last night for about 50 hands while we waited for more players (9 person table). FT collected a rake on about 40 of those 50 hands. An action flop would have busted either me or my opponent after only 1-3 hands. On just those heads up hands action flops would have cost FT money.

But, if either I or villian had busted after a few hands the 3 players who joined us for a bit and then left (adding more rake) wouldn't have done so. In all likelihood the table would have been shut down for the night. Instead, by the time I left there were 6-8 players seated and generating rake for FT.

Action flops make no sense when the goal is to maximize rake.

In S&Gs action hands will bust people faster and many will play additional S&Gs. But, how many recreational players decide they are going to play S&Gs for two hours versus how many decide they are going to play so many S&Gs? Best case is that by rigging you get the player to enter 1 additional S&G everytime they play.

However, since we know that there are people who consistently win at S&Gs we know that the other thing that happens is that the recreational players go broke faster. Once broke they aren't playing...which means no rake until they reload.

Sure, you could add another level of rigging to give the bad players enough wins that they don't go broke. But then the good players will be winning less than they should and they'll either leave the site or go to the cash games. The net effect is reduced rake.

In the long-run rigging will reduce rake.

2 high flush · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:54 am Post subject:

deadmoney314 · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:58 am Post subject:

Again, the more complicated you make the effort to produce a rigged RNG, the higher the reward needs to be for risking a multi-million dollar company. And as you've stated, a rigged RNG realistically hinders efforts to make more rake, the best thing for the house is a perfectly functioning RNG and the best thing is that it has no risk of ruining one's company. Why would a site risk everything to squeeze out a marginal profit lol, in fact these are pseudo profits because of the effects Griff brought up.
Again I need to stress that the mentally retarded need to bring some facts to the table. If there were misgivings on FTPs side, they would have been found a long time ago as there have been active groups both objectively and subjectively looking for the answers through statistal analysis and not one has turned up anything unusual. Until someone does, the burden of proof is on the accusers and the proof of "my gut feeling says so" will not hold water.

griffinlord · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:58 am Post subject:

griffinlord · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:00 pm Post subject:

deadmoney314 · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:01 pm Post subject:

Online Poker Forum at Full Tilt Poker