 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
ball at the end of the day, i guess i was a bit surprised that someone would play 5 8, even limping or otherwise. I've learned that I played this poorly. Who's to say he doesn't shove right behind me with 5 8? I've seen people push 10 3, 2 6 and end up winning.Originally Posted by ballahollic2
I shoved all in QQ Friday and lost to K2.
that is goin to happen because i had noting better to do i ust delt 30 hands out with real cards and 27 were coordinated including 4 with three flush.
you need to realise poker is a game of small edges AA falls to 56 more than 1 in 5 hands crazy thigswill happen and its easy to blame software because its possible it is rigged for action but in that case you are sucking out on them just as often
15bb isn't like you're about to get blinded out. QQ has too much post flop value to shove. I mean, I want AJ or JT calling me on the flop on a Jxx board. I want 99 or 88 calling me on a 7xx board. Where as these players wouldn't be in the hand had we shoved pf. The Ax hands not raising pf there is like 12% of hands. I'm more scared of a K on the flop there than an A. So I'm probably shoving the flop with anything outside of a AKx board. Shoving also makes the fish fold because it polarizes your range and scares them away. Shoving does make the hand easy to play though. The only way I'm shoving pf is if I'm fairly certain one of the villains will limp call a raise light and in this case I'm not sure you can be certain.
Last edited by daneblazer; 10-05-11 at 12:59 PM.
todays joke hand was jacks vs queens about 10 hands in 2 pm tourney
This is an excellent example of why people think poker is "rigged" when it isn't. The number of ways 3 cards can be completely uncoordinated is far less than the number of ways that any 2 can be coordinated. 77% is right around expectation, not some freak outliner.
Thanks stiky!Nice job today buddy, another day another first place!Trying to crack the Top 50 by Halloween.
I think a large part of it is memory, the bad beats are much more memorable than the expected wins.
Really? Thats interesting because I have seen studies of thousands of hands that reflect something different. In the studies I saw the avg # of coordinated flops at a brick and mortar casino was (i am not sure of the exact #) in the low 40 % range and online it was in the mid to high 50's. Thats a 10-15% difference. My "expectation" is they should be roughly the same, correct?
This is an excellent example of why people think poker is "rigged" when it isn't. The number of ways 3 cards can be completely uncoordinated is far less than the number of ways that any 2 can be coordinated. 77% is right around expectation, not some freak outliner.[/quote]
That study has to be crap because its better than 26% chance of it being paired or three straight/flush
it is a frustrating game, and it seems there is alot of set up hands...like people having QQ KK and AK all in the same hand and AK would probably hit a staight or even worse a flush..lol.good times.
So many people think they are playing for a bracelet or Doyle's 500k across the able. It's friggin betpoints, people.
if you think this software is dragging you down by all means stop playing, id like a better chance to win a tourny anyways
WHA!!!!!!
deal with it...it's poker.
agreed
I think I'm going to start playing poker, sounds like it's so much fun.
the more important question is why someone with Q 10 is in a 3 way raised pot
Ever heard of implied odds? In a cash game when u have position if u are not calling a 3x raise with q 10 suited and 2 other players in hand u should find another game.
non pro with 287 posts and more than half in poker you're obviously nothing more than a freeroller off SBR. Yet here you're complaining about the every day tourny where the pay is significantly more than 15 x 45 combined. Also you're complaining about the rollover for winnings?? That just shows how much of a douche you are on the net and in life. Lookin at your post count and how you found sbrpoker you're a ghost or bum or both
nothing pisses me off more than to see freeloaders complain about how they're "not freeloading easily enough"
Happens. Today I got knocked out of the tourny, all-in with TT vs 22 ......you can guess the rest.
Went to 5/10 table to do some rollover, big hand, had the guy beat, runner runner straight to lose 200. Next hand he calls all-in after flop with a two outer ...... and of course hits, down another 200. The guy's calling anything and everything, figured I'd get it all back eventually, but he quit :-)
But, saturday I made 160 in tourny, turned into 300 in rollover, where i hit a royal for 1k bonus, so still very much playing with house money.
no douche (or rather lolguy999) I am complaining about the fake ass rng. I dont want or need anything handed to me, but I should be able to expect to be able to play a fair game.
So other than a few outlier examples of your own (which ironically is proof that the RNG is random), what other proof can you offer than says the RNG is "fake ass".
RNG is becoming brutal I agreeI think I am doomswitched right now. I'm running like a Jew in the holocaust these last few weeks
You are either making shit up or reading some nut job's conspiracy theory. Let's say first card is 7 diamonds. The second card can be coordinated with it if its diamond (12 cards), a 7 (3 cards), or an 8/9 (6 non-diamonds). That is 21/51. Let's say it isn't and pick the 2 of hearts. Now the third card will be coordinated with one of them if its a diamond/heart (24 cards), black 2/7 (4 cards), or black A,3,8,9 (8 cards). That's 36/50. The combined odds is 420/2601 or just 16% uncoordinated. The actual % of coordinated flops is a bit less than 84% because sometimes some of the "outs" are the same - for example if the 1st two cards were 7 & 9 both would share the 8 as an "out".This is an excellent example of why people think poker is "rigged" when it isn't. The number of ways 3 cards can be completely uncoordinated is far less than the number of ways that any 2 can be coordinated. 77% is right around expectation, not some freak outliner.
If you see 40% or even 50% over a significant sample, then the game might well be rigged (away from "action flops"), but the 77% you observed is certainly not evidence of rigging (toward these flops).
Thaddeus
Thad, you make great points. But I am not making the #'s up, I saw them on I think the 2+2 forum. As I said it was a year or two ago so I cant be sure. The thing that still puzzles me is why there was such a big difference % wise between online and b and m casinos.
There are thousands of testimonials out there that state online poker is rigged.
I'm sure those thousands of players writing said testimonials take the fish to the cleaners in live games too.
Stiky I can analyse where you went wrong on your QQ beat. It's obvious if you look and was somewhat pointed out earlier.
the blinds are 75/150. You Min Raise these guys, all of them were already in for 75-150. To call another 150 is nothing especially when it seems like a lame steal attempt. Learn to bet according to Blind size, 3x used to show strength now most people view it as a standard raise.
DennisGreen: Small Blind ($75)
stikymess: Big Blind ($150)
** Dealing Down Cards **
Dealt to stikymess: [Qc, Qs]
Vortexx00: Fold
Stifler: Call ($150)
YorkHunt1: Call ($150)
boeingpower: Fold
DennisGreen: Call ($75)
stikymess: Raise ($300)
Stifler: Call ($150)
YorkHunt1: Call ($150)
DennisGreen: Call ($150)
Ive also heard a thousend testimonials in a b&m that poker is all luck and AA and KK never win. Just poor players trying to rationalize why there dumping cash.
Haven't been back to this forum in a while. Stopped by and saw this thread Read to this quote and couldn't stop laughing at this guy.
I think the "rng's are rigged" posts are the absolute best. As a software engineer they really crack me up. Lets think about it.
If poker was based soley on math then a program could be created to always win it, but there is a problem with that. Poker is not a game that can be solved. It is not like chess or checkers or backgammon for that matter. These are games that computers can solve.
- Most of the "rigged" theorists are usually talking about getting beat by some poor fish who was too stupid to fold a hand a better player never would have played.
- There is no AI software. So how could a program be engineered to "know" that some idiot would not fold a 5% hand? Answer: it can't.
- Based on #2, the better the players at any given site, "rigging" the rng so that crap hands win becomes less productive and less likely to do anything at all. Better players would never see the "rigging" as they would not be in the hand long enough for it to manifest itself.
- So, based on #3, we would have to "rig" the rng for huge hands all the time in order to induce action. I have yet to see verifiable evidence that large pocket pairs occur more often than they should and if they did it would easily be detected.
- So now we're back to #2 intelligent software, which doesn't exist. The software would have to evaluate not only the cards dealt but the likelyhood that player A will continue with a mathematically losing had given the current betting situation and street; and then deal the cards that would allow the "beat" to come. Since AI doesn't exist that means the only possible way the software could make a decission of this nature would be purely based on statistics of player A's hands and how they were played. If the sample of player A's hands is statistically insignificant (to be read small so that the OP can keep up), then the software would have to "guess" and in the abscence of AI it would guess wrong too often to be worth even trying to program that. So if the number of hands is statistically significant (to be read large so that the OP can keep up), then the software needs to be able to parse tens of millions or more hands in milliseconds and make a decission. Now the last time I checked there is not a poker site in the world that can afford the database engines and hardware necessary to pull that off.
If poker was only based on luck then there would be no such thing as a professional poker player, except maybe a few uncannily lucky individuals who are always lucky. Like someone posted earlier, poker is based on math and psychology.
Now at the OP directly. If you can come up with a statistically significant hand sample and the math to prove the rng is rigged, I'll personally send you $100 real cash. As far that goes my money is safe. 100 hands, 200 hands, these are not siginifcant samples. Not to mention that you were arguing mathematics someone explained to you with "but I read somewhere, blah blah blah"
However if you believe none of this, turn yourself into a calling station with any 2 random cards at all times for any amount. Since the rng is "fake ass" you'll do fine. Stop back and let me know how that works out for you.
^ Checkmate
Reply With Quote
