Good question, if I were to answer a year ago I think I would say yes, about the site I play the most poker, but in the last year I think it tends to make me think, namely that the machine is still machine, almost games casino.
SuperPwn said:
They make it statistically impossible for anyone to prove games are rigged. Theoretically AA can be the losing Hand 10 times in a row. And 2 7 the winner. Pokerstars is obviously for entertainment. It’s obviously rigged.
M
member401988
Guest
Do I trust online poker? when I can win my faith grows but I understand that poker is like that because you can't win every day
we're all players and every day you might think I'm losing but winning poker every day is very difficult even if you look at the pros, they lose a lot so it's not about trusting poker, it's just a lot of players in tournaments and you can only win these tournaments you're the only one so just play and you'll win too of course you need to trust sites you already participate in
the difference between online and offline is only in the number of tables) otherwise everything is the same)
it may just seem that you lose more often online, because you play instead of 1 table - 4 for example) and bad beats can happen much more often)
so - yes, I trust online poker)
it may just seem that you lose more often online, because you play instead of 1 table - 4 for example) and bad beats can happen much more often)
so - yes, I trust online poker)
puzzlefish
👆 the guy who's opinion you would trust on this!
Loyaler
But if it is statistically impossible to prove that the games are rigged, then how are they rigged? I think if they are rigged, then there is definitely a way to prove it.Oldstrings said:
It is statistically very possible to check if games are legit or not.puzzlefish said:
All u need is few collections of huge samplesizes of hands played and then check/compare them. This has been done on stars and other sites several years ago. As far as i remember, only i-poker was out of the norm. On stars and other rooms there were no unusual abnormalities.
Dont have a link sorry.
puzzlefish
👆 the guy who's opinion you would trust on this!
Loyaler
You would also have to know what to test for. As far as I know, statistical tests have been limited to the incidence rates of certain hands being dealt and of different draws being completed. Those are the obvious ones since otherwise you could have blatant situations where AA is being overdealt or abnormal frequencies of flushes or full houses appearing.Suns of Beaches said:
There are a lot of aspects about the game that aren't tested. For example, measuring normal vs. abnormal frequencies of draw collisions (how often does a straight on the flop get bested by a flush or a full house on the river, etc.). I highly doubt the statistical analyses that you're thinking of are detailed enough to look at that.
If you played enough offline poker you will believe to every hand that you play online!
I had a though that online poker can throw you out of tournament just because that is a programm but when i started to play offline i understand that we have same chances!
I had a though that online poker can throw you out of tournament just because that is a programm but when i started to play offline i understand that we have same chances!
Of course, I don't need an explanation in badbeats, you just need to understand the better you play, the less risk of being beaten even if nothing depends on you. you just have to accept these rules, as in football, for example, because this is a game of chance and everything is not so simple here. you have to be a conspiracy theorist to believe in online poker conspiracies.
Dude, you're not going to win every hand with AA, you always have a percentage to lose, do you think that in live poker that doesn't happen either, the variance is the same in games, both live and online, if you don't know these concepts poker basics you better study and know how much equity you have in winning hands with certain hands.
