Rigged: The AA test

jaketrevvor · Feb 22, 2008

Recent 12k chunk on stars:

11948 hands, 51 AAs (at a glance it seems around about expected)

Four Dogs · Feb 23, 2008

jaketrevvor said:
Recent 12k chunk on stars:

11948 hands, 51 AAs (at a glance it seems around about expected)

Pretty close. 54 is expected.
"Ignorance is the root and stem of every evil" -Plato

CrackaNACtion · Feb 23, 2008

Four Dogs said:
lol. Well there you have it. [Ath,Ath] ith the betht. I gueth we can clothe thith thwead now.

lmaoo i about fell outta my chair cause this haha. doesnt 99% of card players think aa is best preflop hand

Guittars · Feb 23, 2008

hello all, just spent a while reading this thread so figured I'd post my stats:

ipoker
hands: 6885
AA: 29
About 2 short of expected I think.

G

p.s. I remember one of my very first hands - I got AA on a 2c/4c table. I got raised, so re-raised. Flop came. Other guy checked, I bet, he went all in. He turned over K4o. He hit his 2 pair on the turn. I was convinced he was cheating and got straight onto the live help for a rant. Nothing to it of course. That was several years ago. Have seen much stranger things since. I've actually had AA lose to 72o!

Four Dogs · Feb 24, 2008

Guittars said:
hello all, just spent a while reading this thread so figured I'd post my stats:

ipoker
hands: 6885
AA: 29
About 2 short of expected I think.

G

p.s. I remember one of my very first hands - I got AA on a 2c/4c table. I got raised, so re-raised. Flop came. Other guy checked, I bet, he went all in. He turned over K4o. He hit his 2 pair on the turn. I was convinced he was cheating and got straight onto the live help for a rant. Nothing to it of course. That was several years ago. Have seen much stranger things since. I've actually had AA lose to 72o!

We have a new member to the club. Welcome Guittars and thanks for the contribution. From iPoker no less. Good to see something other than PokerStars. I'll still take them too though.

Yes, you're 2 less than expected, but still close enough to ring the bell of statistical probability.

benthespirit said:
Thanks for you test

You are very welcome ben. Thanks for reading.

Four Dogs · Feb 24, 2008

Time for a facelift along with a few more of my own hands.

Full Tilt
5145 Hnds
Dealt AA 23 Times
Expected 23

PokerStars
2952 Hands
Dealt AA 11 Times
Expected 13

For anyone who wants to contribute to this project, don't think you have to do the math. Just post the number of ring hands, the number of times you've been dealt pocket aces and the site you played at.
Don't forget to filter for the site in your preferences. Don't want to taint our results do we?

Thanks to all for reading and contributing.

Jagsti · Feb 24, 2008

Pstars: 133,321 hands db, dealt AA 625 times. Expected 600 wow I'm running hot (not!). 90.72% win rate.

Four Dogs · Feb 24, 2008

Jagsti said:
Pokerstars: 133,321 hands db, dealt AA 625 times. Expected 600 wow I'm running hot (not!). 90.72% win rate.

Yup, you got an extra 8. lol. Hope you made the most of 'em. Nice contribution Jag.

"Against logic, there is no armor like ignorance." -Laurence J. Peter

WILDBILL IMC · Feb 24, 2008

rigged

thank for info,I feel not rigged just best {for lack of better word for now}shuffel software.

Four Dogs · Feb 24, 2008

jonesnei said:
Yeah man i think its rigged to a certain degree, but its all rigged the same so it should be fair. Right?

Um yeah, I guess. Wait, what?

icemonkey9 · Feb 25, 2008

I have a very small sample size. But it demonstrates that it is rigged!

WTF is up with 10 10?!

Total hands 1683
Hand Times Dealt %
AA 5 0.30%
KK 7 0.42%
QQ 7 0.42%
JJ 7 0.42%
TT 13 0.77%
99 10 0.59%
88 5 0.30%
77 3 0.18%

Four Dogs · Feb 25, 2008

icemonkey9 said:
I have a very small sample size. But it demonstrates that it is rigged!

WTF is up with 10 10?!

Total hands 1683
Hand Times Dealt %
AA 5 0.30%
KK 7 0.42%
QQ 7 0.42%
JJ 7 0.42%
TT 13 0.77%
99 10 0.59%
88 5 0.30%
77 3 0.18%

Congratulations 'monkey for opening the first new site in 2 months, Ultimate Bet 1683 hands down, only 500,000 or so more before we actually know anything. But out of acorns grow mighty oaks.

Interesting spread on those pairs. The expected number is the same for all of them, 7 but the deviation for such a small sample is huge.

If you look at the table, you'll also see how striking the differences in deviations at the different sites. There SHOULD be a direct relationship between the sample size and the deviation, and indeed, Pokerstars with the largest sample has the smallest deviation while UB with the smallest sample has the largest. But there seems to be a little bump in the Full Tilt. results. iPoker with a sample size of just 1/5th that of Full Tilt seems to be more in line with what I'd expect.

jstnorv07 · Feb 26, 2008

I haven't posted here for a while and if you look back you will see posts with my extreme skeptism of poker sites. I have recently become very confident that the poker sites are in fact not rigged. Sorry OP but it wasn't this that convinced me. It was watching some poker videos that Gus Hansen made winning and losing $10K at a time. I seriously doubt he would be playing if he thought they were and I am sure that he has more experience than anyone posting here and would know pretty quickly if something was amiss. I could anticipate someone retorting that the sites would rig in his favor but he suffered some pretty bad beats. There is audio and I think his attitude really convinced me. He basically said oh well I lost $10k not a good day for me I'll try again tomorrow.

Four Dogs · Feb 27, 2008

jstnorv07 said:
I haven't posted here for a while and if you look back you will see posts with my extreme skeptism of poker sites. I have recently become very confident that the poker sites are in fact not rigged. Sorry OP but it wasn't this that convinced me. It was watching some poker videos that Gus Hansen made winning and losing $10K at a time. I seriously doubt he would be playing if he thought they were and I am sure that he has more experience than anyone posting here and would know pretty quickly if something was amiss. I could anticipate someone retorting that the sites would rig in his favor but he suffered some pretty bad beats. There is audio and I think his attitude really convinced me. He basically said oh well I lost $10k not a good day for me I'll try again tomorrow.

You can be a skeptic here. You can believe whatever you want. It doesn't matter becuase this project is about data. You provide it, I post it and anyone is free to make of it what they will.

Kinda strange though how 1/2 a million hands from PokerStars won't convince you, but 50 from Gus Hansen will.

mooleyjones · Feb 27, 2008

I mostly never raise on AA.....they get cracked more than they win.....and some jerkoff wins with that 27 lol..........

jstnorv07 · Feb 27, 2008

Four Dogs said:
You can be a skeptic here. You can believe whatever you want. It doesn't matter becuase this project is about data. You provide it, I post it and anyone is free to make of it what they will.

Kinda strange though how 1/2 a million hands from PokerStars won't convince you, but 50 from Gus Hansen will.

That's actually very easy to explain. If someone wanted to rig the site they could easily find a way to do it so that the players received the statistically correct number of hands. Surely this would be this first thing they would focus on keeping inline with statistics as it would be the easiest to check. However, a professional poker player who I am sure has played more than 50 online hands would have a really good feel for the way the cards should play out. If a site were to rig the games surely they would focus on hand match ups and flops as these would be much more difficult to detect due to folding etc. Since it would be difficult, if not impossible, to get statistics here I would defer to the judgement of a professional poker player.

mendozaline · Feb 27, 2008

All poker sites are rigged.....period.

You guys can split hairs until the cows come home, but nothing would change my perception that when I play online poker, I'm playing against "the house" in some very important way. In other words, it's rigged.

Have a nice day.

Four Dogs · Feb 28, 2008

jstnorv07 said:
That's actually very easy to explain. If someone wanted to rig the site they could easily find a way to do it so that the players received the statistically correct number of hands. Surely this would be this first thing they would focus on keeping inline with statistics as it would be the easiest to check. However, a professional poker player who I am sure has played more than 50 online hands would have a really good feel for the way the cards should play out. If a site were to rig the games surely they would focus on hand match ups and flops as these would be much more difficult to detect due to folding etc. Since it would be difficult, if not impossible, to get statistics here I would defer to the judgement of a professional poker player.

lol. Man, jstnor, you're all over the place. Earlier when it was brought up that the software of on-line poker sites was checked periodically by an an outside source as a condition of maintaining their license. Your FIRST question was "Who pays them?" You do realize that Gus Hansen is an employee of Full Tilt, don't you?

Jagsti · Feb 28, 2008

four dogs do u want party poker stats as well?

Four Dogs · Feb 28, 2008

Jagsti said:
four dogs do u want party poker stats as well?

Absolutely. I'd like to have a meaningful sample from all the major on-line poker sites. Just give me a bit of time after you've contributed to post the results. It takes me a little longer to prepare a new site. BTW, do you have anything from Full Tilt?

jstnorv07 · Feb 28, 2008

Four Dogs said:
lol. Man, jstnor, you're all over the place. Earlier when it was brought up that the software of on-line poker sites was checked periodically by an an outside source as a condition of maintaining their license. Your FIRST question was "Who pays them?" You do realize that Gus Hansen is an employee of Full Tilt, don't you?

Yes I sure do. It was his reactions and attitude. He's not an actor. I do find it pretty interesting that your whole purpose here is to prove that online poker is not rigged. When someone agrees with your conclusions but not your methods of arriving athose conclusions you don't seem to like it. I realize you probably put a lot of time into this and that may color your responses but you might want to consider asking a few questions before jumping down someone's throat. If you had you might have found out where I was coming from before you made the above comments.

Jagsti · Feb 28, 2008

Partypoker, hands = 29,264..... AA dealt = 141 times..... expected = 132 win % 92.91

No I don't have any FT hands.

Are you using sng hands as well as I have 122k hands?

Four Dogs · Feb 28, 2008

Just ring hands Jag. I'll update this tomorrow. Thanks.

Four Dogs · Mar 1, 2008

Jagsti said:
Partypoker, hands = 29,264..... AA dealt = 141 times..... expected = 132 win % 92.91

No I don't have any FT hands.

Are you using sng hands as well as I have 122k hands?

Thanks Jags.

"If at first you don't succeed, keep on suckin' til ya do suck seed!"
- Curly

Makwa · Mar 1, 2008

AA

Good info and approach, will track.

Just wanted to add, last time I got AA in tourney (yesterday), two others pushed us all in preflop. They each had KK. How sweet is that?? What the odds??

Miko

Rigged: The AA test

jaketrevvor

Legend

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

CrackaNACtion

Rock Star

Guittars

Enthusiast

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

Jagsti

I'm sweet enough!

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

WILDBILL IMC

Rising Star

Four Dogs

Legend

icemonkey9

Cardschat Elite

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

jstnorv07

Enthusiast

Four Dogs

Legend

mooleyjones

Rising Star

jstnorv07

Enthusiast

mendozaline

Rock Star

Four Dogs

Legend

Jagsti

I'm sweet enough!

Four Dogs

Legend

jstnorv07

Enthusiast

Jagsti

I'm sweet enough!

Four Dogs

Legend

Four Dogs

Legend

Attachments

Makwa

Undesirable Predator

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site