Whenever someone complains about a bad beat in poker people always say Thats Poker. Like when on the same day i lose with aa to ak all in other player on flop he gets kk, thats poker. Same day same table aa i get all ined with ace 4 off and four flusher to the 4 comes, thats poker. I lose with qq to 77 when flop comes q710 player all ins me turns seven, oh thats poker. I have 44 flop comes a47 i all in at .10 tigjuana player goes to the clock calls turns over aq turn comes ace river is q oh sorry dude he says thats poker!!!. Im playing .50 1 dollar bad beat table get 55 player bets 5 dollars i call flop comes 5a10 player bets 2 i call. Turn comes ace i all in player calls turns over ace seven river is the seven player was froelich who makes stupid animation faces after that river. Oh thats poker. On some hands i was 98 percent after the flop to win. That is not Poker that is INTERNET POKER.
I don't know why people so vigorously defend online poker that its random generated and that the only reason online has more bad beats is because more hands are dealt then in on line. By that argument shouldn't there be the same amounts of bad beats statistically speaking? Ive seen bad beats live but not the quad to quad and all the other circus beats you see online. People say why would online poker with all the money they are reciving from the rake cheat thier customers? Because they can? In Waas case i think the random generators just arent that random I don't think they are out to cheat players but the hands just aren't statistically correct. How many times can you consistently lose to kj with ak and kk to jj and all other overpairs. Somehow you have to come out ahed and that takes a lot of due dilligince on the players part in terms of bankroll management avoiding tilt rages always play withing your bankroll and never go out with the intention of trying to win a set amount of money for the day like having a goal to win 200 dollars. On the otherhand do set limits if you have a bankroll of 1k try not to lose more then 70 dollars for example.
As players we can never be ultimately secure that poker sites are legit, and fair. An example of this is the debacle that occured with Absolute Poker. The only reason they where caught is that someone from withing Absolute Poker blew the whistle. I think personaly the Khanawake gaming commision is a complete farce. Who are they to certify a poker site and isn't it a conflict of interest for them to service all internet poker sites without having other commisions like khanawake in place? Poker sites such as Full Tilt waived the gambling law because they say poker is a skill game? Yet they used poker bots in thier ring games? The bottom line is never lose more then you can afford to lose although im sure that there are millions out there who have done this. Everyone can't be a winner can they? I love poker but If i could win 60 percent of hands where im an 80 to 20 percent favorite I would be ahed. Only way to win is to maximize wins vs losses and never lose more then you can afford. Never go on tilt because when you don't have money to play you don't realize how much you miss something untilt its gone. Good Gambling.
fair comment, I'd agree that there are more bad beats online, even though you play more hands per hour online and alot of players are loose it still doesnt add up in my book.
but youve got to roll with the punches and even if there are more bad beats, they should be evened out in the long run with people getting both their fair share of bad beats and lucky breaks
__________________
There's no reason to become alarmed, and we hope you'll enjoy the rest of your flight. By the way, is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?
"If Jamie Carragher were Italian, we'd build entire dynasties around him." Corriere della Sera
What happened at AP had nothing to do with whether the cards are randomized on online sites in general. That's a rather large leap.
As for whether there are more beats online, a reasonable assessment of that would require sample sizes from both online and offline that are large enough to make comparing the beat frequencies valid. Otherwise, it's just unsubstantiated or improperly substantiated conjecture.
This is a complain that I often here from people who are just starting (beginners), lose with good hands (or hands that they think are good), and because they can't accept/understand the random distribution of the cards, they want to find someone to put the blame on.
If you check the lottery numbers, you will see that some numbers come up waaaaaaaaaaaay more often than others. Is that to mean lottery games are rigged? No, it just means that the sample needs to be bigger (ideally, infinite), so that each number comes up an equal number of times.
Truth is, poker websites have absolutely no incentives to unrandomify their cards, if someone found out, their credibility would be undermined, and they'd lose the billions they make in rake every year.
Hi bako i have been playing poker online 5 years im not a beginner by any means. So you are a person who just blindly believes poker is above board online and have no questions in your belief. I guess ignorance is bliss in your case. I have presented several arguments about how online poker may not always be above board please present your counteragruments to my arguments point by point instead of just saying im a beginner ,your comments would be much more appreciated. Read the article I posted again and provide your counter arguments so we can have a discussion.
so if i have five five vs ace seven board is 5acebrick after flop this is not a good hand? or the 44 4 flops vs aq ace4 brick is also not a good hand? I am wrong in my thinking these are good hands? thanks for setting me straight
Liverpool Live 2006, Liverpool Live 2007 Newcastle 2008,
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Liverpool, , United Kingdom
Posts: 526
You don't really make a lot of points. It just sounds like you've had a bit of a bad run. The AP thing had nothing to do with RNGs and it was actually players on AP who first grew suspicious and unearthed that particular scandal. Not familiar with the FullTilt bot thing. It just sounds like a bit of a tilting rant. In the long run (over your 5 years of online play) i bet you've won nearer 80% of your 80 v 20 races than the 60 you wish for.
I'm not blinkered, i keep my eyes open about dodgy stuff, but i don't think poker sites manipulate hands or RNGs. Just don't see how it would be in their interests. The RNGs are all well-tested and i bet they invest plenty in making sure they're above board.
Sick beats happen at least as often live as online and until someone shows me a spreadsheet proving that NOT to be the case with an absolutely enormous sample size then i'm happy enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan
so if i have five five vs ace seven board is 5acebrick after flop this is not a good hand? or the 44 4 flops vs aq ace4 brick is also not a good hand? I am wrong in my thinking these are good hands? thanks for setting me straight
You called a 5xbb raise with 55, unless you had good info about the raiser that was risky at best.
so if i have five five vs ace seven board is 5acebrick after flop this is not a good hand? or the 44 4 flops vs aq ace4 brick is also not a good hand? I am wrong in my thinking these are good hands? thanks for setting me straight
Yeah, they are good, hands, but it doesn't mean that you'll win every single time with them - By the way you put it in your tilt rant, you expect to win every single time, while at the same time it is completely possible from a statistical viewpoint to lose 5, even 10 times in a row with a flop like that. You just have to be really unlucky, but yes, it can and will happen sometime in your lifetime, and like natsdad said, over 5 years they will all even out.
Also, just to remember, time spent playing poker does not equal skill playing poker. =)
Online poker is very different from real live poker. You usually have worse players, because most of the time they didn't spend a lot of money on the buy-in, and sometimes they are playing 4 or more tables at the same time.
If you watch WSOP, you'll see a lot of KK losing for KJ...
I agree with bakoy, it seems like a beginner's complaint.
Oh, and just for the record, if you have 98% prob of winning and you lose, don't forget 98% is not 100%.
And, of course, you don't remember when you won with AA... but you will always remember when you lost with AA!
Thats Poker, No Thats Online Poker
Linear Mode
