What I've learn't about online poker software

[tennis_balls]

i've observed winbig deep in some big online donkamentz


therefore I conclude that it has to be rigged since he is a donkey

[Ixian]

I suppose this live game is rigged as well?

View here

View here

.

[catrina m]

Originally Posted by lots0

lol When I've had AA cracked... I usually end up geting mad at myself for slow playing them...

Kenny - It is impossible to get 4 jacks on "The Flop". "The Flop" is only three cards.

If you have a pair of jacks and if it flops 2 jacks, you have "flopped" quad jacks.

If you have ace, jack and the flop is JJJ, you have "flopped 4 jacks.

Not impossible.

[Tower-Adrian]

you are also forgetting a key point.
That almost all rooms are on networks. If they were to rig the cards for whatever reason who is going to profit from that? Each room is making their share of rake from the tables, since 1 table will have players from a few different rooms, who is going to win a hand does not matter in the least to the room.


In the AP and UB case that was a hole card cheating scam, and you all saw what happened with that... it was exposed very quickly and they paid the price...

[4 of a kind]

I play a ton of live poker and online poker. All I could add is that I play two different games. Online I no doubt play a more conservative and defensive game.

[4 of a kind]

Originally Posted by Tower-Adrian

In the AP and UB case that was a hole card cheating scam, and you all saw what happened with that... it was exposed very quickly and they paid the price...

What price was that? A 500k fine? People could steal millions of dollars from poker site's and no convictions, or jail time. Damn, if I had the opportunity knowing I won't go to jail, I'd be first on that long line.

[JHV]

Originally Posted by Tower-Adrian

you are also forgetting a key point.
That almost all rooms are on networks. If they were to rig the cards for whatever reason who is going to profit from that? Each room is making their share of rake from the tables, since 1 table will have players from a few different rooms, who is going to win a hand does not matter in the least to the room.

In the AP and UB case that was a hole card cheating scam, and you all saw what happened with that... it was exposed very quickly and they paid the price...

My personal opinion is that the risk is much higher that an individual coder or a small close knit group will instigate this kind of thing - like you point out, I can't think of why a network would ever have a motive, individual rooms not on a network *might* have a motive (just pure greed) but the risk / reward lessens the chance of that imo. But a few of the genius coders who wrote the code? Probably not reimbursed what they were worth (at least that's how they might justify it to themselves)...I believe this is where the threat lies when we're discussing SuperUsers or other kinds of manipulation.

The AP/UB thing was going for many years before it was busted. And it was ONLY busted through an almost COMICAL string of unbelievable errors, from the arrogance / stupidity of Mark Seif and and SuperUsers, to their almost complete lack of understanding of the concept of "cover play" (100% correct river decisions? calling off huge pots with Ten high(?) - these were some of the dumbest people alive, imo).

You give a good player a SuperUser account and if he keeps his mouth shut, for all the rest of the world knows, his name might be durrr

Originally Posted by 4 of a kind

What price was that? A 500k fine? People could steal millions of dollars from poker site's and no convictions, or jail time. Damn, if I had the opportunity knowing I won't go to jail, I'd be first on that long line.

It's a good point you make. And the whole thing was handled messily (and that's putting it generously) by AP/UB, KGC, etc from start to finish.

A lot of people got away with no criminal charges or penalties - when there would certainly have been guys who deserved it and were "let off the hook" imo.

The amount was closer to 15 million I think though - here is a quote from a KGC statement that PN reported:

In particular, the KGC has confirmed that Ultimate Bet has commenced reimbursing approximately US$15M to players who were adversely affected by the cheating incidents. This is in addition to the US$6.1M that Ultimate Bet has already reimbursed to players. The KGC will defer its final decision in this matter for a short period of time for the purpose of ensuring that all required reimbursements have been made.

[hippo925]

Just caught up on this thread and made a few observations. Apparently, if you claim that poker sites may not be "random" or that they may be "corrupt":

1. You are told to get a milllion hands to prove it
2. You are told that you may just be a sore loser
3. You are told that there is no reason ever for software to cheat
4. You are told that random number generators have been verified so no cheating is possible.
5. You are told that you play more hands online and it's all in your head, etc.
6. Etc...etc...etc...

But... if you disagree and believe poker software is random and non-corruptable... all you have to say is:

1. I can't tell the difference... it must be fair.

I'm not taking sides either way, but.... wasn't everyone convinced before that there were no such things as superusers? In fact... the SAME arguments were used to slam on people who brought up superusers and the possibility that others might have had the ability to see hole cards. In fact, some people were bold enough to say that it was impossible because of super security measures by the poker sites.

So excuse me, but at this time... i have much more inclination to listen to these type of concerns since we now know what can be done and the fact is... All of those that said these kind of things were "impossible" or "not likely" were in fact...100% WRONG.

[JHV]

Originally Posted by hippo925

Just caught up on this thread and made a few observations. Apparently, if you claim that poker sites may not be "random" or that they may be "corrupt":

1. You are told to get a milllion hands to prove it
2. You are told that you may just be a sore loser
3. You are told that there is no reason ever for software to cheat
4. You are told that random number generators have been verified so no cheating is possible.
5. You are told that you play more hands online and it's all in your head, etc.
6. Etc...etc...etc...

I'm not taking sides either way, but.... wasn't everyone convinced before that there were no such things as superusers? In fact... the SAME arguments were used to slam on people who brought up superusers and the possibility that others might have had the ability to see hole cards. In fact, some people were bold enough to say that it was impossible because of super security measures by the poker sites.

You're 100% correct except for the small part bolded above. Anyone with half a brain who understood that human greed combined with writing code means ANYTHING is possible in a software program.

And where it's possible, due to the nature of human greed as it comes into contact with "opportunity"...you have a situation where, if corrupted code does NOT exist, it is THAT which should cause shock. Not the other way around.

All you can do is try and work as best you can in a world of uncertainty, armed with a healthy dose of cynicism and (hopefully) an overdose of common-sense.

[4 of a kind]

I play online poker hoping its not rigged in any way shape or form. It will only be proven when it actually could, as in the past.

I rather enjoy everyone that post rigged threads, which are then followed up with an overabundance of posts that defend the sites. Yet, the truth of the matter remains that only 5% of all online poker players are actually profiting from online poker. The names of this 5% also never remain the same for very long. Some players join this elite group while others become losers again. In addition most of the names in this elite group usually consist of either winners of huge purse tournaments, or big stakes ring games. Of course there is the exception which would probably account for 0.001 percent. And bragging about being up a couple of thousand dollars playing online poker today, says nothing about tomorrow. And if you are maintaining a small positive balance, the time invested trying to maintain it, you would probably be much more ahead if you actually worked for someone getting paid for the hours.

My point is that everyone that needs proof like a million hands, or state things like you just suck, and all the other rhetoric that follows are actually losing players.

I believe online poker is different then live. Requires a different game then live for sure. Online I learned to surrender hands quicker then I would have live.

I know when people show win / lose stats when being dealt AA, KK, etc. they are exactly where they belong. But they don't say the amount of chips they actually won or lost with these hands. If 50% of the time I'm dealt AA and can't get anyone to call a 2 or 3 x's raise and only collect the blinds, yes its a win, yet when I flop a set of aces and get all my chips in the pot, I get cracked by quads. Although these hands I mention are extreme I hope you get my point.

Then we got the good old heads / tails theory, of eventually sooner or later getting even. As we all allege, that good and consistent poker players will eventually be a winner in the long run. But if I were betting $100.00 dollars on every flip and after 2,000 flips, I had 1400 heads and 600 tails, my bankroll may not be able to carry me any longer and therefore never will get even.