Rigged: The AA test

Four Dogs · Apr 9, 2008

Thanks for the Full Tilt poker hands pitter. Been pushing for them. Your a little low on the aces and way high on the Kings. 15 is expected for both of them.
Yeah, that winrate for Aces is pretty average. That winrate for KK is downright amazing though.

Here's the updated results. Pushed FTP even further afield.

odinscott · Apr 10, 2008

I was actually losing with AA after 10,000 hands at PS... BUT it was at microstakes which led to lots and lots of people calling all the way to the river. Add to that the fact that probably 30-40% of the time I pushed all-in preflop and it is much more understandable.
Although I dont think that poker is rigged whereas the site cares who wins, I did read a blog where a guy posted results that showed some strange things. It was not that AA or KK came up more often. So if they are supposed to come up (statistically) 5 times out of 1000 hands, they still do. The strange part was that AA and KK came up together more times. What I mean is that lets say AA comes up 5 times out of 1000 hands and KK does as well. They would come up only the 5 times, but they would come up in the same hands. The anomaly was in the number of times that AA and KK came up together, not in the number of times they came up in general.
Now I may not subscribe to the theory that poker is "rigged", but I could see some kind of error in the software, agorythims or whatever, that would cause this. Does not mean that the site is trying to pit big hands for more rake either. It could be simply a software/programming issue.

odinscott · Apr 10, 2008

Oh yeah and to the people that really think it is rigged against them - why would you keep playing at that site? I mean if you think that there is a conspiracy against you, you should try another site where they are not out to get you. Unless they ALL are after you...

Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.

pitter22 · Apr 11, 2008

Four Dogs said:
Thanks for the Full Tilt Poker hands pitter. Been pushing for them. Your a little low on the aces and way high on the Kings. 15 is expected for both of them.
Yeah, that winrate for Aces is pretty average. That winrate for KK is downright amazing though.

Here's the updated results. Pushed Full Tilt Poker even further afield.

Well ill take that win rate with KK as a compliment

it may just because i play no limit and well i dont screw around and usually toss in 3x or 4x the bb which leads to a few walks.

i dont have the exact number right now but i have been dealt AA a few times since my last post which probably has bumped my rate up but still no where near where it should be... but if im winning with my K's ill take those too

EDIT:
i didnt give you my winrate for KK's... or am i just out of it

pitter22 · Apr 11, 2008

here is the quick update..
Dealt AA: 13 / 3675 hands
Percentage: 0.35%

Its getting better!!!

Also.. what is the expected rate for a certain 2 suited cards.. for instance. QK suited (my favourite hand) which i have only been dealt 7 times

odinscott · Apr 11, 2008

I got Aces 16 times in the last 2288 hands on PS.

Four Dogs · Apr 12, 2008

odinscott said:
I got Aces 16 times in the last 2288 hands on PS.

Thanks odin and pitter. I'll add these later today.

BrentD22 · Apr 12, 2008

I was reading a artical wrote by a well known internet player that had evidence of online cheating. It was extremely interesting seeing that this guy usually makes a lot of money playing and at his house, but had some issues with his home computer.

Now saying that I wish I could remember where I read this and who wrote it. According to people who wrote comments they all believed him because he is so well known.

I believe that it IS possible. If hackers can hack Microsoft, Google, or other which have all been done why can some hacker figure out who plays online, find a way to hack into their computer, be able to see their hole cards, and use it as an advantage.

For once someone explain why it can't be happening? I've also read an artical wrote by some internet security expert and he wrote that it is the beginning of the end for online poker because of the cheating. That down the road more cheating scams will be exposed, people will lose their trust, and then stop playing.

I know saying that if someone can't disprove something it doesn't mean it is happening, but I have to say I do believe. Now you don't have to believe, but I think it's worth being cautious.

odinscott · Apr 12, 2008

BrentD22 said:
I was reading a artical wrote by a well known internet player that had evidence of online cheating. It was extremely interesting seeing that this guy usually makes a lot of money playing and at his house, but had some issues with his home computer.

Now saying that I wish I could remember where I read this and who wrote it. According to people who wrote comments they all believed him because he is so well known.

I believe that it IS possible. If hackers can hack Microsoft, Google, or other which have all been done why can some hacker figure out who plays online, find a way to hack into their computer, be able to see their hole cards, and use it as an advantage.

For once someone explain why it can't be happening? I've also read an artical wrote by some internet security expert and he wrote that it is the beginning of the end for online poker because of the cheating. That down the road more cheating scams will be exposed, people will lose their trust, and then stop playing.

I know saying that if someone can't disprove something it doesn't mean it is happening, but I have to say I do believe. Now you don't have to believe, but I think it's worth being cautious.

If I wanted to see hole cards, I would have to hack into your computer. That defintely is possible, it is a trojan. There are software that you can buy that snaps a shot of the victims screen. There are also software that give you total remote access (you can actually see there screen, move the mouse cursor ect - though these would need 2 computers at the attackers house and would be alot more likely to get caught).

I should add that you wouldnt get everyones hole cards, only the victims that had the software installed (you sent the trojan to). As far as hacking into the poker clients site, that would be a decent feet, since they seem to have alot of security (they better since they have all of our money lol). BUT there have been kids that have went to prison for hacking into banks, the FBI, and all types of NASA/military type of places. They can get into credit card databases, they can even get into DMV records, so I wouldnt doubt that it is possible to do. Well I know that nothing is impossible online, but what goes along with that is realistically if someone is doing that, do you think that they would use it to see hole cards (as opposed to just getting into accounts and shifting money whereever they feel like it, hell if they are that good to break into past the security, they probably are good enough to cover their tracks as well).

Ihatecowboys · Apr 12, 2008

when you play online, you get more hands than in real life, and therefore you get more monster starting hands. not exactly hard to understand...

Four Dogs · Apr 13, 2008

pitter22 said:
here is the quick update..
Dealt AA: 13 / 3675 hands
Percentage: 0.35%

Its getting better!!!

Also.. what is the expected rate for a certain 2 suited cards.. for instance. QK suited (my favourite hand) which i have only been dealt 7 times

odinscott said:
I got Aces 16 times in the last 2288 hands on PS.

Updated for pitter and odinsctott.
Thanks.

sonny · Apr 13, 2008

Boltneck said:
Number of tables where nobody is using Poker Tracker = 0.1%
Therefore:-
Maximum number of tables that are juiced = 0.1%

The case is proven - the games are not rigged

There's not much credibility to an argument either way unless the sites were fully government regulated...

If the games are rigged it's much more to be the case in limit poker rather than tourney as they've got the most they can get out of it with several thousand players in...

That is unless the winning players are hosts...

Greed is one thing and honor another...

Which do you have faith in for your answer?...

sonny · Apr 13, 2008

zug said:
u guys must be lucky as hell for your rockets to win 80% of the time.
aa only holds for me 22% of the time against any 2 cards.
be it weaker ace or underpair.

AA should be profitable about 60% of the time so play them...

If it's multiway at the River and a scary board AA up is prolly what you're going to need to win...

odinscott · Apr 13, 2008

sonny said:
AA should be profitable about 60% of the time so play them...

If it's multiway at the River and a scary board AA up is prolly what you're going to need to win...

Is that the real % of them winning? Because that is much closer to how much I win with them, compared to the 80% number.

It shouldnt matter if it is cash game or tournament correct? The only difference that I can see is alot more allin plays probably in the tournament situation.

If we count my last 20,000 hands, my winning percentages are lower than 80, closer to 60 even. But in the last 4,000 hands they are at almost 90%! The offset of this, is that as I posted in another thread, in my last 4,000 hands, I am losing with almost everything! For real, I have the PT stats, and nearly all of the "monster" starting hands I am getting cracked at.

storman99 · Apr 15, 2008

Here's my AAs from partypoker.

Four Dogs · Apr 15, 2008

Wow! That is THE single largest contribution to any site yet. Thank you stormin99 I like the screenshot too. Less chance for someone to make a mistake. This sample now puts Party at number 2 in total hands behind PokerStars and gives us a much clearer picture of what kind of deviation we should be looking for at 150,000 hands or so. At 3% it's still pretty high compared to PokerStars .4% but way better than Full Tilt at a rediculous 10%.

I sure would like to get the opinion of someone more statistically knowledgable than I am at what a reasonable deviation should be. Ideally, the larger the sample size, the smaller it should be, eventually approaching but never reaching zero. Full Tilt appears to be heading in the opposite direction. I'm not sure what it all means at this point.

TJames10 · Apr 16, 2008

i think its soo stupid how people say it is rigged...its poker..any card out of the deck could come up at any time, at random..its completely random.yah ull get a bad beat someteims and maybe even a lot in a short period of time, but im sure theres times where u beat someone with AA or a monster hand with ur crap hand...its so ridiculous how people say its rigged..there is no possible way of knowing that..theres 52 cards in a deck.. ANY card..can come up at any time. thats poker..deal with it

Makwa · Apr 16, 2008

Wow, I think you are getting somewhere 4 Dogs. Seems that all sites with N> 20,000 show similar deviations (except wonky Tilt of course). Ultimate's sample size at 1600 or so is way to small, that's why it is skewed, I guess you need over 10K hands before you start seeing credible figures.

rvp11 · Apr 17, 2008

Thats Poker

I hit the nuts on the flop with an Ace high Flush and decided to slow play it, my opponent did the work for me by going all in and I called. He hits runner, runner 6's to make Four of a kind. I had to laugh, what can you do? Thats Poker, take the good with the bad. I also won a SnG by surviving a couple of all ins where I needed backdoor straights and I made them, so you gotta take the good with the bad.

odinscott · Apr 17, 2008

rvp11 said:
I hit the nuts on the flop with an Ace high Flush and decided to slow play it, my opponent did the work for me by going all in and I called. He hits runner, runner 6's to make Four of a kind. I had to laugh, what can you do? Thats Poker, take the good with the bad. I also won a SnG by surviving a couple of all ins where I needed backdoor straights and I made them, so you gotta take the good with the bad.

I see tons of straights get made on the river. Usually against me.

rvp11 · Apr 17, 2008

odinscott said:
I see tons of straights get made on the river. Usually against me.

Thats not that big of a deal, I can honestly say that happens to me everyday. But a straight doesn't beat a flush does it? And thats what I had. My opponent hit the only 2 remaining 6's in the deck (you still call it a deck even though it's online right?) to make Four of a kind, thats a bad beat whatever language you speak. Losing to a straight? So the **** what?

bob_tiger · Apr 17, 2008

rvp11 said:
Thats not that big of a deal, I can honestly say that happens to me everyday. But a straight doesn't beat a flush does it? And thats what I had. My opponent hit the only 2 remaining 6's in the deck (you still call it a eck even though it's online right?) to make Four of a kind, thats a bad beat whatever language you speak. Losing to a straight? So the **** what?

lol what? me no speaky your language, me speaky enligh. if you can make that little bit more understable, would def help thx.

rvp11 · Apr 18, 2008

bob_tiger said:
lol what? me no speaky your language, me speaky enligh. if you can make that little bit more understable, would def help thx.

No need to be patronising, I'm seeing that a lot on this Forum from more of the senior members.

Perhaps you can tell me which bits you couldn't comprehend?

odinscott · Apr 18, 2008

rvp11 said:
No need to be patronising, I'm seeing that a lot on this Forum from more of the senior members.

Perhaps you can tell me which bits you couldn't comprehend?

I hear you that you are disturbed cause you got sucked out on. Perhaps look at the thread that I complained about the same thing. Mind you all of those were in one day (or maybe two?).

p0kertime · Apr 18, 2008

i tihnk theirfore i am

Boltneck said:
It's a shame that you feel this way, but I think that you are confusing 2 different issues. Yes, people who accuse sites of being rigged and fail to supply any evidence to support that are often ridiculed, and justifyable so (in my opinion). However, I would challenge you to reply here with a link to ANY thread on this site where a member, either new or old, has been ridiculed for asking for advice.

Again, I think you may be getting 2 issues muddled into one. The Absolute debacle related to individuals who were cheating (and caught out). This was not a case of the poker site being involved, though most will accept that the site's security was crap in the extreme. Again, I would challenge you to post a link to a thread on this site where anyone has claimed that cheating (by individuals) does not exist. Indeed, there are several threads where just such behaviour has been highlighted. Nobody (as far as I know) has been ridiculed for suggesting that there are people out there who try to cheat.

we all know their are cheaters why money but thye do get caught casino's when caught have a bigger stake at losing thier gaming licenses so i find it a lil hard to swallow they'd even risk that much.. so maybe a fake site would.. i guess i won more than i lost so i have no quams about it..think cheaters allways get caught greed kills them..so sooner or later it will bite...my stats i don't record i'm sure the sites do it for me..in my logs every hand ever played data input 010101010

Rigged: The AA test

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

odinscott

Legend

odinscott

Legend

pitter22

Rock Star

pitter22

Rock Star

odinscott

Legend

Four Dogs

Legend

BrentD22

Rock Star

odinscott

Legend

Ihatecowboys

Enthusiast

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

sonny

Rising Star

sonny

Rising Star

odinscott

Legend

storman99

Enthusiast

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

TJames10

Rising Star

Makwa

Undesirable Predator

rvp11

Enthusiast

odinscott

Legend

rvp11

Enthusiast

bob_tiger

Legend

rvp11

Enthusiast

odinscott

Legend

p0kertime

Enthusiast

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site