Only logged-in members can vote!
→ Click here to create a Mob account which gives you access to our forum and all our free bankrolls (no deposit bonuses) → Log in to existing account!
Posted by jessthehuman: I'm sorry Kraemer, honestly, not trying to pick a fight, but your post only illustrates your own personal lack of understanding of the concepts and data presented
Maybe....
But when I looked at their site yesterday (yes i like to read first and discuss it afterwards) the link from this thread brought me to their pokerstars analysis. And there I had to read:
In order to achieve this it was assumed that the population behaved as a binomial distribution. In reality the population is an imperfect binomial distribution since the probability of success, p, varied for each hand. In a perfect binomial distribution the "probability of success of each event, p must be the same for each trial". For more on this see this discussion.
So far so good, but the "this discussion" is not a clickable link on the pokerstars site. So i went to the discussions and limitations section at the bottom of the page and didnt find a single word about this matter there.
Sorry, but that made me sceptical, because if p must be the same for each trial, while the actual values of p in our case have almost the maximum possible spread ( 5% - 95% ) this indicates (best case) that your calculations are going to have almost the biggest possible error or even (worst case) that it is absolute nonsense to treat this case as a binominal distribution.
So I dont take their word for it that their standard deviation is accurate, when they admit that their method of calculating it is unprecise and refer to a none exsiting discussion... If the standard deviation is wrong then this complete analysis is worthless so they cant just come up with a value without any explanation.
Today I went to their site again and... VOILA On the party poker section the "this discussion" is a link, so I clicked it. After being able to read the information they refer to I admit that the standard deviation they work with is accurate.
So they didnt present their concepts on the pokerstars page (which makes it a little hard to understand them) and I'm too sceptical to use your approach of "considdering they calculated a correct standard deviation" though you admit not to have read the discussion. I'm not a believer... At last it's math, so if someone makes a point he can (and has to) proove it. Or would this change Your mind about this matter: I have a proof poker is rigged and You can see it in this discussion.
So after having all the info I admit that this analysis prooves that preflop allins with 2 players are non-rigged. What about the other 99%. I think they are random too, cause i too think that the pokersites would not risk their goldmine business for a mere dollars more... But those who want to believe that the sites ripp them off, rather than to admit that they are donks still have wide playground open for their theories which You can not deny based on this analysis.
The only way to proove it's not rigged would be the use of an open source RNG combined with a software that could check if the current hand was generated by this exact RNG.
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Canada
Age: 36 (M)
Posts: 3207
i still dont believe its rigged. who cares that they only tested allin preflops. if they were to test a million hands with all differnt ranges it could go eather way. who says 7-9 offsuit cant beat AA 9 times out of 10? its poker everyhand is differnt and every flop/turn/river is differnt. all these tests will prove is that everyhand CAN win in poker no matter what kind of garbage your holding
Joined: Mar '08
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 44 (M)
Posts: 6714
Your right, ish, arsenej1, the only thing all these test will ever prove for sure is any hand can win, statistically the likes of AA vs 79o AA should win 80% ish i think(cant be arsed checking) but as you say nothing says it will, take the coin flip, 50/50 now if you were to flip 1k times and every time heads comes up then according to statistics then that coin is rigged, but that does not make it so. Here's the thing, all the rigtards in the world have never been able to pin it down, they try hard, actually most don't have the brains to and insist on ignoring what is proven, some move on to the next theory, others are mules. It seams so far there is NO WAY to prove it is rigged, all the options are open if people wish to chase down a theory, innocent untill proven guilty. Perhaps the sites are on step ahead, who knows, rigtards don't that's for sure, always a lame theory with no backing and lack of understanding. Some people still believe the earth is flat, etc etc, there just is no talking to them, arrogance, ignorance, stupidity, lack of ability and always why doesn't some one blar blar blar. Simple answer is if it is rigged prove it or shut it, stop with the 6 year old why questions. Oh and to lighten the mood BOOBS...FUCKKKINNNN BOOOBS.......................
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
Posted by kraemer: and I'm too sceptical to use your approach of "considdering they calculated a correct standard deviation" though you admit not to have read the discussion.
Just to be clear. This is EXACTLY what I said
"I haven't read the discussion. But obviously from this I would say they would have determined a standard deviation that would represent reasonably well a figure that you would get if you repeated this 1million hand analysis enough times to get an actual standard deviation."
Paraphrase me if you like, but don't ever twist my words.
Joined: May '09
Location: India
Age: 37 (M)
Posts: 4873
Posted by kraemer: If the standard deviation is wrong then this complete analysis is worthless so they cant just come up with a value without any explanation.
you keep on making assumptions without any understanding of statistics or data analysis. going by your theory most of the human population based studies are worthless.
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Portugal
Age: 44 (M)
Posts: 4827
Lets face it: there can be rigged and not rigged poker on the net, it is so big that it has space for everything. We have to remember something: before being an online mass game, poker was a casino game. That means there were some "tricks" behind them since the begining. When we play it with 52 cards only and with friends, there's no scheme on it. But online, with randomization programs ruling it, things are different. In a casino there is no slot machine which is not rigged. They are prepared not to give that sequences everyone want to see all the time. Or wlse, there wouldnt be enough money, that's the reality.
oh ya they should look at tigergaming then, or acctually play in a game,be it real or freeroll. I myself play enough freerolls and such,that I personally find that your opponents get a heck of a lot more SUCKOUTS at tigergaming than at any other sites,and believe me I play a lot of sites and lots of hours. thank you
