Joined: Feb '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 56 (M)
This is in response regarding the BRM post/thread on ‘Rigged Online Poker’/rooms etc etc and all over the internet since online poker began. after reading quite a few of these over the years and going through the motions myself as well as seeing others painful bad beats, this article opened my mind a little more: keep it real in your replies peepz..bless.
Please Note: This is not my article it was posted by a ‘Charle River on Poker Junkie) in 2010, I don’t know him. I found the article after reaching Random Generataed Numbers information, basically doing some Sherlock Holming i believe it;s a good issue/pionts to consider.
I do not know if said company/mentioned still does the testing as this was posted in 2010-11, that is not the main issue as their must be a few professional registered companies that do testing for gaming gambling rooms, this please read on:
I found the article very interesting and in the interest of online poker/players, so I wanted to share with BRM members for their opinions on the subject matter, (no bad beat stories please there’s millions out there…and if you think yours was bad rem this one, the worst I believe in the history of poker as it was WSOP ME final table & the main man of the day Phil Ivey: AK vs Darvin Moon AQ knock-out final table, Darvin’s Q hit turn, the poker world was watching (sick) Phil was apparently in turmoil and screwing backstage, so when I have a bad beats I rem how Phil must have felt, that keeps me tournee grinding lol.
Oh by the way my worst bad beat to date was when my quad 6s got hit by 6-10 str8/flush deep .. I was elminated 3rd from bubble cash-tournee knock-out at Tilt last year boo hoo…..thers been more quad over quads etc etc you felt them hits to I’m sure, so done on that subject.. read on:
This is about the soft/hardware and mathematical probabilities in online poker and the poker-rooms efforts to research all possibities/avenues for a TRUER FORMAT, just my opinion. (victoryv111)
I am posting this in the interest of poker lovers/haters etc.. after reading the many posts on rigged poker rooms (pokerstars where I play being the most mentioned), personally just like many of you I’ve had my share of bad beat stories, negative swings, suck-outs etc etc, and popped a few with worst myself, I also believe you will never out beat you’re your foes who play bad and win with bad play, theres just to many of them. I do believe with good play on the long run you will come out on top as I proved to myself this year and finally have had a little success compared to what I deposit.
I have won lost won lost won etc, but love poker like most of you and seek a true game so I posted this with a issues that Charlie points out. I’ve numbered the issues/points Charlie mentions for those who don’t want to read the article, my point is it made me think a little more and I believe it needs to be addressed for the long term benefit of all parties.
This involves the testing of not just RGNs, but also: 1: statistical randomness 2; poker hand life-cycle” testing 3: The possibility of manipulating the play of a hand after the RNG step has been thoroughly tested.”
Please note; I am not defaming any poker room here I play exclusive at Pokerstars and Full tilt on occasion. but I believe these are key-points to think about in helping to deliver a FUTURE TRUER GAME OF ONLINE POKER.
We are the players/menebers, we have power to make changes, if we unite victoryv111/Poker Warriorz -stars & tilt-brm member.
(I also read once in statement to join/reg on by WPT regarding their poker room, they have the best and truest form of RGN in the poker industry?, it left me thinking up till this day)
Below is Charlies article your views on serious topic is welcomed gg good luck all, but don’t rely on it, Go Get HIT..(tip) vv111
Poker Stars Testing the RNG – Not Good Enough Posted by : Charlie River / ON POKER JUNKIE 30 Mar2010 maybe 2011
Categories : Online poker Poker Stars have tested their RNG. But a piece of the puzzle is missing. A fatal piece. I believe online poker is fair. I’m a believer. Therefore it really bugs me that the poker rooms have such a hard time providing hard core evidence that online poker is not rigged. Can’t they see the importance of this?! For their business as well as for online poker as a whole? Poker Stars RNG tested by Cigital Poker Stars have had reliable auditor Cigital test their RNG (Random Number Generator). It passed the test, which seems to have been really detailed and to the point. BUT as far as I can see, they’ve still only tested the RNG, NOT the entire play of a hand from shuffle to showdown. Of course this will not shut up the doubters. A piece of the puzzle is missing.
A certificate may not be good enough Only the RNG tested Paco Hope, Manager of Cigital’s Gaming Services, describes the testing as follows (according to Poker Stars): “Our assessment looked at the entire solution, including the hardware and the software, and confirmed that the output of the RNG is cryptographically random and truly unpredictable.” “Cigital analyzed the source code, entropy sources and documentation for PokerStars’ RNG implementation.”
“Using standard methods for exploiting RNGs and having full access to the source code, Cigital found no weaknesses in the PokerStars RNG, concluding that the implementation adheres to the current state-of-the-practice in generating random seed values.” Dr. Gary McGraw, Chief Technology Officer at Cigital added: “Our analysis shows conclusively that the PokerStars RNG used to generate the poker hands dealt on PokerStars.com makes proper use of statistically random sequences.”
Cigital’s Certification of Security says the same: “Cigital, Inc. obtained random number generation hardware direct from the manufacturer and software source code from PokerStars. Sample output was gathered and tested under controlled conditions at Cigital’s labs in Dulles, Virginia, USA. Output of the random number generator was tested using two well-known test suites: the statistical randomness test suite from the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the DIEHARD statistical randomness tests. Cigital analysts also performed manual review of the source code related to the use of the RNG and its output.”
What about the rest of the software Apparently they’ve tested the source code and outcome of the RNG, not the complete source code of the poker server or the outcome of entire hands. Good effort, but not good enough. Because now what everybody is asking is this: “What happens after the shuffle?“
How are the randomized cards being dealt to the players? What happens during the hand, behind the scene? Theoretically it wouldn’t be a problem introducing an element of cheating once the RNG has performed its task at the start of a hand. This possibility has to be tested as well. The missing link I’m missing this little statement:
“The possibility of manipulating the play of a hand after the RNG step has been thoroughly tested and found to be non-existing.” It’s nowhere to be found. Cigital confirms this in the certification (while Poker Stars passes with silence on this limitation):
“This determination of statistical randomness does not extend beyond the software and hardware components examined. These results pertain only to systems composed of the hardware and software that were tested when they are operated in the manner described to Cigital during the evaluation.” What happens after the RNG has not been tested. Why the hell not?! Analyzing a billion actual hands
To be a good-enough test, questions like these would have to be addressed:
“How often does AA lose to 72 on the river – if we look at actual hands having been played or at least at the code of the entire software?” “How often does a losing player get AA compared to a winning player – if we look at actual hands having been played or at least at the code of the entire software?”
Until a big, independent auditor performs this kind of “poker hand life-cycle” testing, the non-believers will never shut up. They will continue screaming in my ear about online poker being rigged. Please make them stop!
Joined: Feb '11
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 53 (M)
So...maybe there is something here........ but then if you were going to rig something wouldnt you make it so complex that any such test would fail based on the randomness of probabilities? When you think some sites play thousnads of hands on thousands of table a day it would have to be one hulluva test!
Ontil then...play on and rely on the god of random etiquette!
Joined: Feb '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 56 (M)
i bleieve It is in the interest of their business that the poker rooms should conduct test they have all hand histories and player data, to run these tests on aregualar quartely basis and chart results breakdown for general.public interest regardless of examples used.
They did such a random test a few years back based on HEADS UP 1 million hands, best hand pre-flop vs worst hand to river showdwon...the results came out more or less just a slight edge for best hand. something to think about tho! gg gl