Do you think online poker uses software that drives bigger rakes?

[HarryCaray]

Yeah I know, that is what I was saying to HC. Obviously the elite players aren't going to just start breaking even, but if you chop a small amount of their edge off, it keeps the fish in the game longer and allows for further rollover. I have no clue if this happens on smaller sites (although for Pstars I have a pretty good idea it doesn't, 1 of my friends was 1 of the better midstakes cash game grinders on the site until its demise and he said it was much ado about nothing) But smaller sites are much more wild, wild west obviously.

And I'm saying I think that even that is too complicated. What specifically would you do to "chop a small amount of edge off" without making it so drastic that elite players lose? It would be such a fine science, especially because each table would likely contain several fish and several good players.

Just because you're saying the edge would only be slight doesn't make the algorithm any simpler. In fact it probably makes it more complicated.

 

[pocketrockets]

Yeah I know, that is what I was saying to HC. Obviously the elite players aren't going to just start breaking even, but if you chop a small amount of their edge off, it keeps the fish in the game longer and allows for further rollover. I have no clue if this happens on smaller sites (although for Pstars I have a pretty good idea it doesn't, 1 of my friends was 1 of the better midstakes cash game grinders on the site until its demise and he said it was much ado about nothing) But smaller sites are much more wild, wild west obviously.

I agree. I have my dispute with pokerstars, some old beef but is the best option all around. Being trying to re up my account for 4 years now. And nothing.

 

[PatsFan1283]

And I'm saying I think that even that is too complicated. What specifically would you do to "chop a small amount of edge off" without making it so drastic that elite players lose? It would be such a fine science, especially because each table would likely contain several fish and several good players.

Just because you're saying the edge would only be slight doesn't make the algorithm any simpler. In fact it probably makes it more complicated.

I don't think it is happening. Just saying if you could it off that would be the optimal way to do it.

 

[HarryCaray]

I don't think it is happening. Just saying if you could it off that would be the optimal way to do it.

Gotcha. I even disagree with that a little bit, but I see what you're saying.

I think the optimal and more realistic thing to do is to skew it so new players win for awhile. If you deposit 100 and lose it right away you might never come back, but if you deposit 100 and run it up to 500, most will lose it back and then redeposit.

 

[CHOPTALK]

Hmm FTP? The same FTP that was caught in a world wide ponzi scheme where sponsored players/action holders were taking out "loans" from FTP bankroll that included present player balances with the total knowledge of their main CEO?

There is no proof that Pokerstars ever commited a major shank against their customers, doesn't mean they are not greedy enough, could mean they are super good to hide it. There is a lot of wacky shit going on everyday on online poker, if you multitable, it will only take you a couple of days to really witness some sick puppy shit.

Their explanation it's always due to seeing more hands and inexperienced players staying on the hand when they should have folded, blah blah. I have seen bad players, TERRIBLE players, that I have noted on my data winning SNG's and MTT's in a regular basis with a 100% losing game strategy, basically calling all in on the flop with one over and hitting, runner runner flushes and straights. KK vs 10-9: 2-5-Q -- 10 -- 9 and similar shit.

Also, the "illegal" use of automated poker bots (which are for sale just google it, and subsequential taint of the game), bots that are made to break even or play above average to rake and clear bonuses, etc. There are poker rooms that allow this. And if there is technology like this (I have tried a bot before, it works, just not as promised). There are certainly bots capable of deciding a best spot to pressure the algorithm of the RNG. I mean I guess there are bright folks working on stuff like this ALL THE TIME, HUGE potencial for massive profits.

I had over 10 million hands saved on my Hard drive . I had a program that would tell exactly how many times I got each combination of hands.

If I wanted to know how many times I got AA or 9 of clubs and 3 of hearts it was all at my fingertips.

Not a single card combination out of all those hands was above or below 1% the normal range.

 

[CHOPTALK]

For instance when you are running bad sometimes you think your pocket pairs don't hold up all in preflop as much as it should.

The program tells you situations like that to.

And sure enough over the course of millions of hands my PPs beat over cards almost exactly the percentage they were supposed to.

My over cards outraced my opponents PPs exactly as often as they should.


Short term variance is very underrated

 

[CHOPTALK]

A few years ago I said that online poker was rigged and geared towards the donks. Choptalk and festering zit both called me an idiot for thinking that way.....as always.....give it time and King Vit will be right.

Your still wronG

 

[CHOPTALK]

I don't really buy that.

First off I don't think it would help traffic; at least not if you let the fish win long-term. You have to keep the sharks happy or they will take their business elsewhere, either because they suspect something is up or they just change sites because they feel your site is "unlucky". And the regs are the ones that keep traffic steady. Fish come and go. Best to let the ecosystem take care of itself.

Secondly, and more importantly, I think it is just too complicated of an algorithm to actually implement. It's not like it is as simple as a heads up table with one known shark and one known fish. At a full ring game you might have 3 fish, 2 regs, and 4 unknowns - with turnover of 1 seat every couple orbits (at LEAST). So who do you let win? You know how difficult it would be to stack the deck so that all the fish get their turn at winning while all the sharks are losing evenly? But it would have to be a slight edge, because otherwise it would be too obvious. How do you not cooler one fish against another? How do you predict what hands the players will play and what they will fold preflop? If you are letting the fish win and tilting it against the sharks, how do you even know who is a shark and who is a fish? It would get so convoluted, because at some point your "fish" are actually the long-term winners and the "sharks" are actually the long-term losers.

No way, even IF a site had the motive I think it would be WAY too difficult to even pull off for whatever minimal theoretical benefit there is to gain.

That would seriously be some crazy complicated software.

Great post.


This is what I've always thought when someone brings that up.

 

[pocketrockets]

What are your thoughts on poker bots being used and sold for as low as $130 and every site allowing them for more rake?? (only sites that actively ban and track poker bots are pokerstars and FTP).

 

[CHOPTALK]

What are your thoughts on poker bots being used and sold for as low as $130 and every site allowing them for more rake?? (only sites that actively ban and track poker bots are pokerstars and FTP).

I love playing against bots.

Bring them on

 

[festeringZit]

A few years ago I said that online poker was rigged and geared towards the donks. Choptalk and festering zit both called me an idiot for thinking that way.....as always.....give it time and King Vit will be right.

The fact that you'd say something so stupid, and then double down on it shows how utterly ignorant and stupid you really are. Oh, and it also speaks to your little "story" about being
a retired poker pro.

As if the software analyzes the skill level of the players, and then says "oh look, this player is a donk, I think we'll give him some better cards, and rig it for him."

There is no incentive for the software to do this, and actually it would be a disincentive for skilled players to actually play online, which is the opposite action than the poker sites would want.

Now, if someone would argue that the software is rigged to increase rakes by building larger pots, this at least makes logical sense as a motivating factor for the poker sites, not that
I think they actually do that...

 

[vitterd]

The fact that you'd say something so stupid, and then double down on it shows how utterly ignorant and stupid you really are. Oh, and it also speaks to your little "story" about being
a retired poker pro.

As if the software analyzes the skill level of the players, and then says "oh look, this player is a donk, I think we'll give him some better cards, and rig it for him."

There is no incentive for the software to do this, and actually it would be a disincentive for skilled players to actually play online, which is the opposite action than the poker sites would want.

Now, if someone would argue that the software is rigged to increase rakes by building larger pots, this at least makes logical sense as a motivating factor for the poker sites, not that
I think they actually do that...

As if me believing Internet poker is rigged has anything to do with my live poker winnings. Only someone as fucking dumb as you would say something like that.

clearly there has been enough sites and players busted as cheats to see that anything is possible.....I've watched dolts make tons of cash online and then get mopped up in every live game the play.

 

[vitterd]

Your still wronG

Many people feel the way I do. If you know as many people inside poker as you've said in the past......you would know many of them feel the same way.

 

[PatsFan1283]

Many people feel the way I do. If you know as many people inside poker as you've said in the past......you would know many of them feel the same way.

When it comes to the bigger sites (the sites the majority of people you cite have probably played on) then they're just paranoid and wrong.

It's not much different than someone saying sports is rigged with no proof and just "feel". People used to say the same thing about online blackjack, it's like people in this thread have said, a lot of that comes from sheer # of hands.

 

[vitterd]

When it comes to the bigger sites (the sites the majority of people you cite have probably played on) then they're just paranoid and wrong.

It's not much different than someone saying sports is rigged with no proof and just "feel". People used to say the same thing about online blackjack, it's like people in this thread have said, a lot of that comes from sheer # of hands.

The excuse that I hear most is the " you see many more hands" but I'm not a believer that's the reason. Online blackjack is rigged at many sites also. I simply don't trust any online gaming.

 

[PatsFan1283]

The excuse that I hear most is the " you see many more hands" but I'm not a believer that's the reason. Online blackjack is rigged at many sites also. I simply don't trust any online gaming.

I would never play online blackjack for the hell of it but I used to bonus whore a little and tracked the results and I don't think it was rigged, results over a large sample fell within expected range of probability. This was at a lot of smaller sites, but it was awhile ago.

 

[festeringZit]

When it comes to the bigger sites (the sites the majority of people you cite have probably played on) then they're just paranoid and wrong.

It's not much different than someone saying sports is rigged with no proof and just "feel". People used to say the same thing about online blackjack, it's like people in this thread have said, a lot of that comes from sheer # of hands.

Bingo. And it's even more ludicrous to say something like "online poker is rigged to award the donks." ROFL.

 

[PatsFan1283]

Bingo. And it's even more ludicrous to say something like "online poker is rigged to award the donks." ROFL.

In the first page of the thread, I do say I could buy it being rigged that way. I was moreso just speaking to what I think would be an optimal way to cheat if you could pull it off since it would keep the ecosystem flowing. I don't think it actually happens.

When you say you think they make the software have bigger pot sizes, do you mean at bigger sites or smaller sites? I couldn't imagine the big 2 would bother with something like that.

 

[vitterd]

Bingo. And it's even more ludicrous to say something like "online poker is rigged to award the donks." ROFL.

Completely rigged....setup hands created for action.....people had cheat software to see others cards......UB was known to have pocket aces lose to pocket 9's a huge percentage of the time. Thankfully they got caught cheating.

Keep the donks fat with money.....the whales will make money elsewhere....whales plus donks with money equals huge pots. It's a major scam and why you see idiots win a lot of money online and go broke in live games.....it's not a coincidence.

 

[PatsFan1283]

Vitt you're making stuff up. Just because UB had a scandal 6 years ago doesn't mean all of online poker is rigged. That is like saying because Tim Donaghy, all NBA games are rigged.