winbig
Keep winning this amount.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2005
- Location
- Pennsylvania
How did I fair?
Just be glad you won the low
How did I fair?
Just be glad you won the low
he didn't win the lo either
I have the hi & low nuts & im expecting to get called.
1) me - A 6 hearts 2 q
2) player 2 - 88 34
3) Player 3 - 55 10 j
4) player 4 - 34 67
Oops, didn't notice that. I just saw:
I will repeat my suspicion that these "pros" are affiliates who take commision of the money given to the rake by other players (the affliate helped into bringing these players to the casino).
Basically that means that such affiliates are something like casino share holders.
I just noticed that in your profile Pokeraddict, you are stating you are a "pro". And you say you are not an affliate, whereas you have the bonuswhores page! That type of page can only belong to an affiliate.
Perhaps not earning a percetage of the rake other players are gining to the rake, but a standard fee for every player registed to each casino through your page. You denied this. But I repeat the indications.
And I will repeat, what a strange coincedence I got bad reputation points from only 2-3 people out of 1,200, and you were one of them.
But let's suppose that all my suspicions are wrong. Lets start from another basis: Suppose that I am a crap poker player, and that was the reason of my losses, and not that I was cheated. As I said, I wish I could believe that I am a crap player, cause then I could hope I was not cheated. Variance, it could not be. I played thousands of hands with pennies.
So, supposing I was not cheated, but I am a crap player. I have a serious question for you: What is your edge as a player if there was zero rake? Higher than 5%? So your edge exceeds the 5% rake and you can make profits with a 5% rake? Yes, I know you play bonuses and rakebacks, but lets forget about them. I am asking your edge if there was zero rake, and no other promotions. Don't tell me that it depens on your opponents. I am talking about your average edge overall.
(for those who dont understand, edge is the $ of average profit for every 100$ wagered)
Someone claimed that there are no fishes anymore as they are used to be, so he breakes even having the 5% rake, against him, but he gets the bonus at the end and the bonus equals his profits.
So that player claims his edge as a player if there was no rake, is exactly 5%.
So, what about you pokeraddict? And what about all of you constant winners at poker? What is your edge supposing the rake was zero?
So, what about you pokeraddict? And what about all of you constant winners at poker? What is your edge supposing the rake was zero?
how long until you are sitting at a poker table in Vegas wondering how many of the other players are bots?
I just noticed that in your profile Pokeraddict, you are stating you are a "pro". And you say you are not an affliate, whereas you have the bonuswhores page!
You commented on everything besides my question. Whats your edge against other players if the rake was zero? More than 5%? (anyway, I know you play with zero rake, or even less (!), but that is irrelevant to my question).
THEN why are you all blaming my poker skills for my losses?
the few examples you have provided indicate that you are not an advanced poker player.
1.) If it is almost impossible for a player to have a higher gross edge than 5%,
which could be e.g. 9% (because of his higher skill than other players) and thus have a net edge of 4% after this 5% rake, THEN why are you all blaming my poker skills for my losses, instead of saying that there was no cheating, but I simply lost because this 5% is unbeatable? Only one of you said this, the one who said that fishes are becoming fewer and less fishy, and he breaks even when he has a 5% rake against him, but he takes the bonus at the and as a profit.
see above reply
2.) If, on the contrary, a good player can easily have a higher gross edge than 5% ,
which could be e.g. 9% (because of his higher skill than other players) and thus have a net edge of 4% after this 5% rake, THEN since you cannot know the level of my poker skill, how can you conclude that my skill differs THAT MUCH from this good player, and therefore that I lost because of my poor skill and not because of cheating? And if it doesnt differ that much, then I lost because of cheating! (as I explained before, it could not be variance).
pokeraddict might never be the best at any given table. Maybe he just avoids the strong players and makes his profit from the fish. That in itself is a skill, one of which you do not seem to have grasped
Pokeraddict admitted that he cannot calculate his gross or net edge, and he only knows that he has an unknown to him net edge, which means that he has a gross edge that can be anything above the 1% which is the rake he pays. So, if you constant poker winners cannot calculate your gross edge, how can you answer the above complications? However, I thank Pokeraddict who finally answered something on the point of the matter and clarified this matter I had doubts about. I add him I thanks (if I do it correctly).
refer to my answers above and come to your own conclusions.
Therefore, whichever of the above two cases is the truth, your argument that I lost because of my poor skill is unreasonable.
Your limited information answers it
I am expecting accurate answers.
If they just bet the nuts, keep raising them off a hand. You will collect all the small pots and beat the rake. When they raise, just fold. poker101
My opinion is that (providing that there is no cheating) the gross edge of a simply conservative player can reach even above 15% (a net edge of 10%) in some poker rooms, especially at limit tables, where everyone (and always) bets not simply like a fish, but like nuts! And that is exactly the reason I suspect the management for cheating:
review your own betting strategy. Bad beats happen but if you do not know how to take the value out of the fish, you are the fish.
Since the players there are soooo fishes, and they get constantly so lucky against my strong hands, then it is very probable that either:
A.) these super-fishes are the management or programs who take whatever cards they choose, and thus getting quickly the money of normal players, and at the same time they attract the existing and new players, exactly because of their super-fishness.
Again I am suggesting that you are the fish so you should benefit by this type of fixing
B.) or they are real fishes, but exactly because of this, the good players have a huge e.g. 10% net edge against them, and they are bound to end up with twice the profit of the rake makes. So the management has a tremendous motive to fix the cards in their favor against good players, in order to balance the wins and losses of all players, so that rake takes it all at the end (as I analysed in my previous posts).
Ive had fish who sucked out on me big style. I like finding these players because they are just ATM's if they hang around long enough. Just reload and keep taking the value out of their optimistic calls
I think these super-fishes do not exist in other sites, (at least that much). You can also check this at the players/flop stat of each pokeroom. That doesnt mean of course that these other sites do not cheat.