United Poker Forum  

Server Time: 1/7/2009 4:22:53 AM PACIFIC  
Programed Miricle Hands, TAKEDOWN, 15. Jan 2003 05:46
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
On many online sites, I,ve noticed what seems to be a pattern of
many high hands being delt to multiple players round after round.

trips being beat by streights, nut flushes beat by full houses.

I could understand this happening on occasional hands but to be
happening round after round on a single sessions leads me to
question (not yet believe but to question) are online poker sites
programing these hands to create more action at the tables which
increases their rake?

Any and all replies to this question will be appreciated.

takedown
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Kevin J, 15. Jan 2003 06:58
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
There are a couple of reasons I can think of for your observations..

1. There are more hands being dealt per hour online. This means you can expect more unlikely events to occur in the same time frame as that of live play.

2. These games might be looser games than what you are used to. Players are playing more hands and going farther with them. If you multiply this by the extra number of hands being dealt, the illusion of more unlikely events is going to appear.

You didn't mention this, but another possible reason so many people experience more difficulty online is that they are seeing a wider variety of playing styles than they are used to. For instance, I'm a 20-40 player who doesn't play much online. But when I do play online, I play 5-10. Mix 20-40 players with 5-10 players who have all picked up different playing styles from different areas around the world, and you are going to see some hands being played in what might sometimes seem like a very strange manner. If you don't adjust properly, you're going to have problems.

That said, I really hope this forum doesn't degenereate into a bitching post for online bad beats (there have been several other recent posts questioning if online rooms are on the up and up). Anyone who questions the integrity of a game they are playing in, is a fool to continue playing in such a game. It's that simple. IMO-
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Bluerabbit, 15. Jan 2003 15:27
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
on 15. Jan 2003 06:58 Kevin J wrote:
> There are a couple of reasons I can think of for your observations..
>
> 1. There are more hands being dealt per hour online. This means you can expect more
> unlikely events to occur in the same time frame as that of live play.
>

Online poker is faster but not that fast. I recieved three straightflushes in one week. For most people thats 1 to 3 years of play at a casino. I saw 3 separate hands chopped with identical pocket pairs in one hour. In the same hour i saw 2 hands dealt miracle quads on the river. Online poker does not deal that much faster for these hand to appear so frequently.

> 2. These games might be looser games than what you are used to. Players are playing
> more hands and going farther with them. If you multiply this by the extra number of
> hands being dealt, the illusion of more unlikely events is going to appear.

Has anyone done a average comparison to see how many more hands are dealt an hour online vs in a cardroom.

> You didn't mention this, but another possible reason so many people experience more
> difficulty online is that they are seeing a wider variety of playing styles than they
> are used to. For instance, I'm a 20-40 player who doesn't play much online. But
> when I do play online, I play 5-10. Mix 20-40 players with 5-10 players who have all
> picked up different playing styles from different areas around the world, and you are
> going to see some hands being played in what might sometimes seem like a very strange
> manner. If you don't adjust properly, you're going to have problems.
>
> That said, I really hope this forum doesn't degenereate into a bitching post for
> online bad beats (there have been several other recent posts questioning if online
> rooms are on the up and up).

I think this is called Ad hominem. Where you attack the character of the debator instead of their salient points (and preemptively at that). If you think people telling their experiences is bitching or are bitches this issue will never get clarified.


Anyone who questions the integrity of a game they are
> playing in, is a fool to continue playing in such a game. It's that simple. IMO-

Yes one option is to stop playing if the deal seems rich or rigged, but a better option is to lobby for verification of the methods of operation that online poker uses. LuckyOne has been proposing independantly verifing the integrity and standardizing the deal through Pokervault. This idea is bang on and a neccessity if online poker hopes to grow. People have been saying that whiners and complainers only have ancedotle (somebody fix my spelling please) evidence and should shut up if you cannot prove your allegations. To those people who say this, I say that we whiners bring more to the table to prove that online poker is dealing with a rich deck than those people who defend online poker with absolutely nothing but the statement that it is a figment of our imaginations. These same people cannot prove that online poker is dealing straight and have no evidence to have those beliefs.
My suggestion is for people to put their support behind pokervault and see where it ends up.

And don't forget for those people who accuse somebody like me of libeling or slandering online poker, libel and slander are points of law and online poker is not subject to American law.

Bluerabbit

While somebody's at it please fix my sentence structure
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Kevin J, 15. Jan 2003 20:15
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
As to how many more hands per hour, I would think it's at least twice the amount of what a live dealer could get out. I've seen rates of 70 hands per hour in a 9 handed game.

Poker's a strange game. If you play long enough, you're gonna see some amazing things. I once made quads 4 times in 2 rounds during live play. There's no doubt that if that had been online, people would be complaining that the deal was somehow fixed.

I can't say it's NOT rigged any more than you can say it is. But I do know that it's a natural tendency for people who lose their money to look for something (other than themselves) to blame.

If there IS a problem with online poker sites, it's hard to believe that whining and/or becoming an alarmist is the most productive way to fix the problem. Better, would be if these people simply wrote a strong letter or e-mail explaining why they will no longer be patronizing their games and then QUIT doing business with them! If enough people do this, these sites will have no choice but to deal with the issue and treat it seriously. IMO-
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Ashley Adams, 15. Jan 2003 20:29
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
This is very true.
I was playing Hold Em the other night at Foxwoods. I saw the same player get a straightflush two hands IN A ROW! He beat a full house the first hand and Quads the second. Now, if that had happened on line someone, somewhere would be using the hand history as proof that the game was rigged.

Ashley Adams

on 15. Jan 2003 20:15 Kevin J wrote:
> As to how many more hands per hour, I would think it's at least twice the amount of what a live
> dealer could get out. I've seen rates of 70 hands per hour in a 9 handed game.
>
> Poker's a strange game. If you play long enough, you're gonna see some amazing things. I
> once made quads 4 times in 2 rounds during live play. There's no doubt that if that had been
> online, people would be complaining that the deal was somehow fixed.
>
> I can't say it's NOT rigged any more than you can say it is. But I do know that it's a
> natural tendency for people who lose their money to look for something (other than themselves)
> to blame.
>
> If there IS a problem with online poker sites, it's hard to believe that whining and/or
> becoming an alarmist is the most productive way to fix the problem. Better, would be if these
> people simply wrote a strong letter or e-mail explaining why they will no longer be patronizing
> their games and then QUIT doing business with them! If enough people do this, these sites will
> have no choice but to deal with the issue and treat it seriously. IMO-
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Bluerabbit, 16. Jan 2003 08:55
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
on 15. Jan 2003 20:29 Ashley Adams wrote:
> This is very true.
> I was playing Hold Em the other night at Foxwoods. I saw the same player get a straightflush
> two hands IN A ROW! He beat a full house the first hand and Quads the second. Now, if that had
> happened on line someone, somewhere would be using the hand history as proof that the game was
> rigged.
>
> Ashley Adams
>

Yes but did this happen once or two more times in a week. It will be part of poker experience to see odd hands, but not to see them continuously and repeatively. I have witness two players have both ends of a straight flush in real play but I probably will not see it for a long time, years maybe decades. Online I seem to find rare hands that continually repeat themselves and it is not when the opposition has mediocre hands but when they are strong and seated to the right of the miracle hand. Someone will naturally say this is how miracle hands naturally play out. Yes once and rarely not on a weekly basis. In real play when someone pulled off quads of a straightflush there would be an appreciation for this situation shown by a collective ahh because this is not a common event compared to a full house or less. But online has made me numb to these ocassions because they happen routinely and with great drama (meaning that someone usually loses with full house). Again you will say this is how miracle hands play out and again I reply yes but not weekly.

To not speak up about this and keep silent because I do not have physical evidence, (like computer software exposing the online sites corruption) is unfathomable to me. More people should talk about their bad beats, their cashout syndromes and their rich deck observations. Online poker sites are not accountable to anyone ( and they are not going to hand over their software for analysis). Until online poker can without a doubt prove that they are working fairly nobody should settle for the status quo.

I have poker colleagues who say "why do you bother? You got to be nuts to play anywhere where you cannot check the deck or observe the deal. I would rig the game in those circumstances, online poker would be nuts not to fix the game" Well my answer to that is my colleagues are probably right and I am just waisting my time. My job is to make sure im not the fish or mark and take care of my own earning. So if you people love to play in an unsure enviroment go ahead remember any two cards can win.

Bluerabbit
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Soleo, 19. Jan 2003 11:44
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
What type of data you need as a proof that dealing is OK? Let me post analysis of more than 26,000 hands what I was involved in at Paradise Poker made by PokerStat software. Hope this would be enough to deplete this topic. Please look at all three sections and then make your decisions.

*** 1. STARTING HANDS ***

Total hands you were dealt cards: 25342

All suited starters dealt: 5912 (23.33%)
All suited starters expected: 5963 (23.5%)

All connected starters dealt: 4000 (15.78%)
All connected starters expected: 3975 (15.7%)

Suited connector starters dealt: 976 (3.85%)
Suited connector starters expected: 994 (3.92%)

Paired starters dealt: 1493 (5.891%)
Paired starters expected: 1491 (5.88%)

AKo dealt: 217 (0.856%)
AKo expected: 229 (0.905%)

AKs dealt: 72 (0.284%)
AKs expected: 76 (0.302%)

Any AK dealt: 289 (1.140%)
Any AK expected: 306 (1.21%)

A's dealt: 103 (0.406%)
K's dealt: 119 (0.470%)
Q's dealt: 118 (0.466%)
J's dealt: 115 (0.454%)
T's dealt: 123 (0.485%)
9's dealt: 129 (0.509%)
8's dealt: 111 (0.438%)
7's dealt: 122 (0.481%)
6's dealt: 105 (0.414%)
5's dealt: 103 (0.406%)
4's dealt: 114 (0.450%)
3's dealt: 121 (0.477%)
2's dealt: 110 (0.434%)
Each pair expected: 115 (0.452%)

*** 2. FLOPS ***

(Note that only data for hands where a flop was dealt are used.
Hands where no flop was dealt are skipped.)

Total hands you were dealt cards: 25342
Times a flop dealt when you were dealt cards: 23932 (94.44%)

When user dealt AK, flops at least one A or K: 97 (34.77%)
expected: 90 (32.4%)

USER HAS ANY TWO SUITED CARDS (dealt 5664 times):
Using both user's hole cards, flopped a:
3 flush: 2298 (40.57%) expected: 2355 (41.6%)
4 flush: 600 (10.59%) expected: 620 (10.9%)
5 flush: 60 (1.06%) expected: 48 (0.842%)
Three cards on the flop make up a:
3 straight: 195 (3.44%) expected: 180 (3.18%)
2 flush: 3110 (54.91%) expected: 3122 (55.1%)
3 flush: 339 (5.99%) expected: 296 (05.22%)
any pair: 967 (17.07%) expected: 959 (16.9%)
Hand user flops:
High card: 2956 (52.2%) expected: 2981 (52.6%)
Pair: 2290 (40.4%) expected: 2289 (40.4%)
Two pair: 224 (3.95%) expected: 229 (4.04%)
3 of a kind: 102 (1.80%) expected: 89 (1.57%)
Straight: 28 (0.49%) expected: 23 (0.412%)
Flush: 58 (1.02%) expected: 47 (0.835%)
Full house: 4 (0.071%) expected: 5 (0.0918%)
Four of a kind: 0 (0.000%) expected: 1 (0.0102%)
Straight flush: 2 (0.035%) expected: 0 (0.00589%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.000654%)

USER HAS ANY PAIR (dealt 1452 times):
Using both user's hole cards, flopped a:
Underpair (to flop): 342 (23.55%) expected: 341 (23.5%)
Overpair (to flop): 365 (25.14%) expected: 341 (23.5%)
Set: 151 (10.40%) expected: 167 (11.51%)
Quads: 9 (0.620%) expected: 4 (0.245%)
Three cards on the flop make up a:
3 straight: 49 (3.37%) expected: 46 (3.18%)
2 flush: 827 (56.96%) expected: 799 (55.0%)
3 flush: 55 (3.79%) expected: 75 (5.16%)
any pair: 258 (17.77%) expected: 249 (17.1%)
Hand user flops:
High card: 0 (0.0%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Pair: 1047 (72.1%) expected: 1043 (71.8%)
Two pair: 242 (16.67%) expected: 235 (16.2%)
3 of a kind: 144 (9.92%) expected: 156 (10.8%)
Straight: 0 (0.00%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Flush: 0 (0.00%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Full house: 10 (0.689%) expected: 14 (0.980%)
Four of a kind: 9 (0.620%) expected: 4 (0.245%)
Straight flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00%)

USER HAS OFFSUIT CONNECTORS FROM 54o to JTo (dealt 1525 times):
Using both user's hole cards, flopped a:
Open ended: 134 (8.79%) expected: 130 (8.55%)
Double belly: 7 (0.46%) expected: 8 (0.531%)
Straight: 18 (1.18%) expected: 19 (1.26%)
Three cards on the flop make up a:
3 straight: 34 (2.23%) expected: 48 (3.15%)
2 flush: 851 (55.80%) expected: 839 (55.0%)
3 flush: 60 (3.93%) expected: 79 (5.16%)
any pair: 279 (18.30%) expected: 258 (16.9%)
Hand user flops:
High card: 781 (51.2%) expected: 803 (52.6%)
Pair: 624 (40.9%) expected: 616 (40.4%)
Two pair: 74 (4.85%) expected: 62 (4.04%)
3 of a kind: 25 (1.64%) expected: 24 (1.57%)
Straight: 18 (1.18%) expected: 19 (1.23%)
Flush: 0 (0.00%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Full house: 3 (0.197%) expected: 1 (0.0918%)
Four of a kind: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.0102%)
Straight flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00%)

ALL FLOPS SEEN BY THE USER:
Three cards on the flop make up a:
3 straight: 789 (3.30%) expected: 762 (3.19%)
2 flush: 12994 (54.30%) expected: 13177 (55.1%)
3 flush: 1265 (5.29%) expected: 1239 (5.18%)
any pair: 4117 (17.20%) expected: 4054 (16.9%)
Hand user flops:
High card: 11893 (49.7%) expected: 11994 (50.1%)
Pair: 10194 (42.6%) expected: 10113 (42.3%)
Two pair: 1157 (4.83%) expected: 1138 (4.75%)
3 of a kind: 499 (2.09%) expected: 506 (2.11%)
Straight: 90 (0.38%) expected: 94 (0.392%)
Flush: 58 (0.24%) expected: 47 (0.197%)
Full house: 29 (0.121%) expected: 34 (0.144%)
Four of a kind: 10 (0.042%) expected: 6 (0.0240%)
Straight flush: 2 (0.008%) expected: 0 (0.00139%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.000154%)

*** 3. Final boards ***

(Note that only data for hands where a river was dealt are used.
Hands where no river was dealt are skipped.)

Total hands you were dealt cards: 25342

Total final boards seen when you were dealt cards: 17311

USER HAS ANY TWO SUITED CARDS (dealt 4220 times):
Four flushes flopped: 488 (11.56%)
expected: 462 (10.9%)
When flop four flush, got flush: 191 (39.14%)
expected: 171 (35.0%)
Hand user has at river:
High card: 700 (16.6%) expected: 735 (17.4%)
Pair: 1846 (43.7%) expected: 1799 (42.6%)
Two pair: 856 (20.28%) expected: 933 (22.1%)
3 of a kind: 187 (4.43%) expected: 183 (4.33%)
Straight: 221 (5.24%) expected: 192 (4.56%)
Flush: 305 (7.23%) expected: 275 (6.51%)
Full house: 94 (2.227%) expected: 94 (2.22%)
Four of a kind: 5 (0.118%) expected: 5 (0.126%)
Straight flush: 6 (0.142%) expected: 3 (0.0663%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00781%)

USER HAS ANY PAIR (dealt 1112 times):
A set flopped: 128 (11.51%)
expected: 125 (11.3%)
When flop set, got boat or quads: 39 (30.47%)
expected: 43 (33.4%)
Hand user has at river:
High card: 0 (0.0%) expected: 0 (0.00%)
Pair: 401 (36.1%) expected: 394 (35.5%)
Two pair: 434 (39.03%) expected: 440 (39.5%)
3 of a kind: 141 (12.68%) expected: 130 (11.7%)
Straight: 24 (2.16%) expected: 21 (1.90%)
Flush: 9 (0.81%) expected: 22 (1.95%)
Full house: 90 (8.094%) expected: 95 (8.54%)
Four of a kind: 13 (1.169%) expected: 9 (0.842%)
Straight flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.0160%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00182%)

USER HAS OFFSUIT CONNECTORS FROM 54o to JTo (dealt 1101 times):
Flopped open ended: 106 (9.63%)
expected: 94 (8.55%)
When open ended, got straight: 32 (30.19%)
expected: 33 (30.7%)
Hand user has at river:
High card: 202 (18.3%) expected: 189 (17.2%)
Pair: 431 (39.1%) expected: 470 (42.7%)
Two pair: 245 (22.25%) expected: 245 (22.3%)
3 of a kind: 59 (5.36%) expected: 48 (4.35%)
Straight: 104 (9.45%) expected: 100 (9.12%)
Flush: 28 (2.54%) expected: 21 (1.95%)
Full house: 30 (2.725%) expected: 24 (2.22%)
Four of a kind: 2 (0.182%) expected: 1 (0.126%)
Straight flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.0209%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 0 (0.00110%)

ALL RIVERS SEEN BY THE USER:
Hand user has at river:
High card: 2988 (17.3%) expected: 3014 (17.4%)
Pair: 7535 (43.5%) expected: 7586 (43.8%)
Two pair: 4091 (23.63%) expected: 4067 (23.5%)
3 of a kind: 821 (4.74%) expected: 836 (4.83%)
Straight: 836 (4.83%) expected: 800 (4.62%)
Flush: 549 (3.17%) expected: 524 (3.03%)
Full house: 450 (2.600%) expected: 449 (2.60%)
Four of a kind: 34 (0.196%) expected: 29 (0.168%)
Straight flush: 7 (0.040%) expected: 5 (0.0279%)
Royal flush: 0 (0.000%) expected: 1 (0.00323%)

Four to a flush on board 729 (4.211%)
expected: 743 (4.29%)
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, nonameplayer, 15. Jan 2003 14:41
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
Ah, DuH
sounds like u may be smarter than the average poker bear, there,
TakeDown.which according to Puggy Pearson has an I Q
of about 65
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: Programed Miricle Hands, Piers, 19. Jan 2003 13:37
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
Here is the post I made on RPG about six weeks ago to someone else raiseing the same point (yet again).

You underestimate the ease in which statistical analysis can be used to detect biased deals. Slight biases in the deals can be picked up in only one or two thousand hands, or even less. A large number of paranoid online players have collected large databases of hands, many of these have sufficient knowledge of statistics to analyse them intelligently. Not one has produced creditable hard evidence of biased deals. I do not believe that any bias that has an effect on cardroom revenue could be small enough to escape detection.

A corollary to the above is that, any site that provide hand histories
that can be easily parsed into a database are not knowingly using a biased dealing algorithm. Think about it.

Of course it is inevitable that in the fullness of time, some site will
start up using some sort of biased deal. They will never attract a
significant number of punters without being detected.

        Return to Thread List
 
 
       POKER FORUM HOME   |   POKER FORUM   |   LINK TO US   |   ARCHIVE   |   ONLINE POKER Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum  
Getting Started |  UPF Tournaments |  Poker News, Views, Rules |  Poker Strategy & Psychology |  Money and Bankroll
Poker Bonuses & Promotions |  World Series of Poker (WSOP) |  Play Online Poker |  Poker Odds & Statistics |  Tournament Poker |  Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools
Looking for a Poker Game |  Poker Bad Beats |  Not Quite Poker |  Quizzes and Polls |  Forum Suggestions & Bugs

Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network