Originally posted by GooRukYONG
good luck with the recovery..
Thank you
Notifications
Clear all
Originally posted by NenadNacevic
I don't think DoN is more skill than SnG
(if they are bad - the game is easy; if they are good - it's hard)
I honestly think its the other way around. Good players are easier, they have more respect when its due. Bad players are very hard to move off hands, but I can get a good player to fold ace rag, but not a bad player.
Im finding myself in the same situation as the OP. Every hand, picked, and played accordingly and each time get hit by a suck out.
Im playing low stakes, and with a very small bank roll but that bank roll wont grow.
Its frustrating and I know no way to fix it. Im not a bad player, but im not a good one... I think an ok player is better to my level (folding AQ knowing the other guy has AK, but the other AQ still calls...).
Originally posted by Menschdefekt
Im playing low stakes, and with a very small bank roll but that bank roll wont grow.Its frustrating and I know no way to fix it.
It's called - adjusting.
Man, I really hoped I'll never come here again, but what happened in last 4 days is just over the top.
I'm taking 5% less hands won, as normal now. So I don't have to come here every day.
From around 10th of March till 30th of March I played around 2000 SnG's - 5% RoI. Didn't get any special luck. Winning around 2-3% less hands then I should.
Then there came last 4 days...
From 592 Super Turbos (3.8$ ones) I played, I went all in 988 Times:
1) 314 were those where they had 2-3 outs (and I'm not even that picky, they just like to call with anything)
2) 248 were those where I'm ahead but they got 2 live cards (counting coin flips where I'm slightly ahead)
3) 255 I'm behind with 2 live cards (counting coin flips where I'm slightly behind)
4) 171 I'm behind with 2-3 outs
So what happens?
1) Man, I didn't have them dominated this often in a while and what do I get in return?
Winning only 148 from 314. In other words, 47.1% instead of 75.2%
Some of those include:
QQ vs 77 vs 73 --> 7 comes.
AA vs AK vs AQ --> 1 had flush, other one had straight.
KK vs K6 --> 66 on the flop.
And so on and so on, it's fucking too many. I remember going once all in on 4 tables at once with 72-82% chance to win on each one, and losing all 4.
It changes from annoying to heart-breaking, when shit like that happen constantly. Try coping with losing 7 of those hands in a row.
2) This is actually the one that saved me from hanging myself.
Won 125 from 248. Or 50.4% instead of 56.7%.
Nothing special here, same ol'...
3) Here's the special bit again.
Won 73 from 255. Or 28.6% instead of 44%.
It' frustrating, you know? When you go all in with a hand that is behind, knowing it has a chance, but still not hoping because it loses almost every time.
What's 28 fucking percent? Do I have 6 or 3 fucking outs??
4) Here I actually won 121 from 171 hands, aka 70.7% instead of 24.7%...
Nah I'm just kidding, it's actually 17 from 171. Or 9.9% instead of 24.7%
Those became so rare that I could have easily closed the table, before seeing the outcome. To avoid stressing out at least.
When I won AK vs AA hand, by hitting a flush (AK was unsuited), I was staring in disbelief saying "how the fuck did that happen?".
In all I lost 168 hands less then I should, losing 255$, instead of winning around 110$.
At one point I actually started minimizing tables when going all in, because I could not watch the outcome anymore.
I decided to do some more research and sue them even if it takes me to sell my flat, so I can pay the lawyers.
I mean, is this "the poker" you all are experiencing? Or is it just me?
This is not poker, this is a fucking circus and I'm an idiot for taking that shit for this long.
Note 1: I didn't count meaningless all ins like when I have 60 chips and blinds are 50/100 and similar - where I, of coarse won more then I should have.
Note 2: It was astoundingly big amount of QQ vs 95 types of hands where they miraculously flop 77, or a straight, or a flush with unsuited hand etc.
I mean, I can understand calling with KQ and hitting a K, but calling with complete rubbish and hitting some "miracle" that often is not bearable if feasible at all.
Wow fun fun fun to read this! Keep'em coming! I've always liked reading about people's complaints and how unfair life and everything else is! 
Im starting to lose my trust and doubt in the fairness of Online Poker. It's just unreal how you always first run awesome and then whenever you start to take shots you lose. Or never ending runner runner bad beats. Every single serious pot. I'm not talking about losing with Top pair or with a small two pair. But with sets up to four of kinds.(not only few times, but every serious shot taking pot) I'm talking about getting Kings heads up against Aces in every higher stakes game you play out of you're bankroll. I went from 1300$ into 0.04 this week. And I must say that my skills didnt have anything to do with it. Lost in a stake i can easly encounter. Went -300$ in a day through bad beats. And then started to take shots in higher stakes. Lost them all. Expect one. Grinded back up. Lost again. Then tilt and then burned out and fail.
Maybe I'm just a terrible player who runs like shit. But i still love this game. Even tough I don't feel inspired of playing poker in online anymore in higher stakes. Because as I know how cold and self-beneficial businesses are. Why should be poker elsewise in online? . Far away in distance you have no security of fairness. But i still believe if you follow rules strictly and stay in you're limits you'll be fine. Just major downswings are getting it difficult to be profitable. Also tightness plays a role. The less hands you play, the less you get badbeaten in Online. Even though loose-agressive gamestyle can be really profitable. But the whole internet shit feels so fishy after you've gone through 400.000 hands in lifetime in cash tables.
Originally posted by Nrkah
Im starting to lose my trust and doubt in the fairness of Online Poker. It's just unreal how you always first run awesome and then whenever you start to take shots you lose. Or never ending runner runner bad beats. Every single serious pot. I'm not talking about losing with Top pair or with a small two pair. But with sets up to four of kinds.(not only few times, but every serious shot taking pot) I'm talking about getting Kings heads up against Aces in every higher stakes game you play out of you're bankroll. I went from 1300$ into 0.04 this week. And I must say that my skills didnt have anything to do with it. Lost in a stake i can easly encounter. Went -300$ in a day through bad beats. And then started to take shots in higher stakes. Lost them all. Expect one. Grinded back up. Lost again. Then tilt and then burned out and fail.Maybe I'm just a terrible player who runs like shit. But i still love this game. Even tough I don't feel inspired of playing poker in online anymore in higher stakes. Because as I know how cold and self-beneficial businesses are. Why should be poker elsewise in online? . Far away in distance you have no security of fairness. But i still believe if you follow rules strictly and stay in you're limits you'll be fine. Just major downswings are getting it difficult to be profitable. Also tightness plays a role. The less hands you play, the less you get badbeaten in Online. Even though loose-agressive gamestyle can be really profitable. But the whole internet shit feels so fishy after you've gone through 400.000 hands in lifetime in cash tables.
I analyized what did i do wrong in some pots. So i clearly see my flaws in game. I still got a lot to learn about the game and fix my flaws. It just my gut feeling tells me it ain't completly fair game field. That's all.
@Nrkah
I agree completely with what you wrote.
I read your post long time ago but I couldn't get myself to reply seeing no one here thinks it's possible that a big sites are capable of "altering" their card dealing code, so it benefits them slightly.
I feel like I'm seen here as a blabbering mad man, and no matter how my downswing is unlikely to happen, and no matter how much "evidence" I provide, I'll still be a mad man.
If I own PokerStars and I had these conditions met:
1) If just slight alteration in dealing code would give me 5% more money.
Read somewhere that in 2007 they earned 1.000.000 $ per day; 5% of that would be around 20 million $/year; and in 2010...who knows...
2) If that alteration is so subtle that a few people will notice;
and even then, it can be blamed on variance,
3) If no one believes that big Poker sites can be rigged in the first place,
...then, guess what, I'd rig it too.
Because, you know...rich people are greedy and can never have enough.
I think I actually came close to having a heart attack I laughed so hard.
Poker sites make money from rake, so how would spending thousands of dollars on software engineers to subtly alter dealing patterns specifically against certain players whilst still passing regulations make any sense. And more to the point why would they choose to benefit players other than yourself, unless you are suggesting that they are taking further risks with the law by also putting bots out there.
You crack me up.
Just follow others advice and post some hands (that aren't obvious bad beats) in the forums.
Ok, so your one of those who don't believe it's possible, I get it.
Let me answer you since I see you couldn't be arsed to read the whose thread (you could answer them yourself...but here, I'll indulge you):
Poker sites make money from rake, so how would spending thousands of dollars on software engineers to subtly alter dealing patterns...
So you couldn't even read my last post huh?
Thousands vs 20+ Millions, I'll leave it at that.
...whilst still passing regulations...
I don't know how those programs are tested.
5% difference sounds like something that can be blamed on variance.
Or maybe they could just slip in the fair one, for the testing.
Or maybe few millions might make it pass...
I don't know but the possibilities are there.
And more to the point why would they choose to benefit players other than yourself, unless you are suggesting that they are taking further risks with the law by also putting bots out there.
I didn't say I'm the only one. Others are just broke long time ago to notice it would go for ever.
You crack me up.
Ditto.
Because, you're serving all that as a fact. That it's not possible.
When you actually don't know anything.
Just follow others advice and post some hands (that aren't obvious bad beats) in the forums.
Ok, since you didn't read the rest of my posts here, I'll recap.
15.000+ DoN's & SnG's where I won 4% less hands then I should.
I went through most of those after the games and wrote it down.
(so how possible is that gormless? and can you blame me for thinking like this?)
Not sure whats the probability of that happening but It borders with impossible.
I read most of threads here and didn't came across one single case that is similar. Mostly lasting few weeks the most; and 95% of those are not even downswings, mostly perceived as such because they lost 5 out of 25 pocket aces.
Originally posted by NenadNacevic
So you couldn't even read my last post huh?
Thousands vs 20+ Millions, I'll leave it at that.
I don't know how those programs are tested.
5% difference sounds like something that can be blamed on variance.
Or maybe they could just slip in the fair one, for the testing.
Or maybe few millions might make it pass...I don't know but the possibilities are there.
I read your post, but my point was how does fixing it so that player a or player b wins mean they make more money.
Poker stars do not profit from your deposit, but from the rake.
If player b wins instead of you, he pockets your cash not the poker site.
Or are you saying that player b is a bot or playing for the site.
15.000+ DoN's & SnG's where I won 4% less hands then I should.
I went through most of those after the games and wrote it down.
(so how possible is that gormless? and can you blame me for thinking like this?)
You seem to be a bit confused about probabilities.
15000 games is an absolutely minute sample size.
If you are an 80% favourite to win a hand, it does not mean that you will win 80% of the time over a small sample. Over millions of games yes, but not 15000.
It seems you have been unlucky. But you are not the only one to have a downswing. Read the other blogs and graphs.
But you need to stop focusing on the bad beats and make sure you look at the rest of your game, and fix your leaks. Plus if you can't handle swings switch to a less swingy game like NL BSS.
Arggghh .. I promised myself I wouldn't let myself get dragged into these ridiculous rigged threads. This is my last post in this thread.
I wish you all the best on the tables and in changing your mindset.
First off, I have to apologize if I sounded rude.
I had the impression from that post, that you just came here to argue for the sake of it.
I read your post, but my point was how does fixing it so that player a or player b wins mean they make more money. Poker stars do not profit from your deposit, but from the rake. If player b wins instead of you, he pockets your cash not the poker site. Or are you saying that player b is a bot or playing for the site.
Wrote about it before, but here it is again.
Benefit that they get, is from letting the games finish earlier then they're supposed to.
In other words, letting bigger stack win more often then it should or setting up AA vs KK situations more often then they should happen.
Ending a DoN or SnG (that usually last 45mins) just 5 mins earlier, means that it lasts 11% less...or in other words 11% games will be played = 11% more rake.
Hope that made some sense.
And as I know when to push/fold I'm usually lower in chips when I'm all in vs some big stack bully who likes to call with anything. Why I'm winnig less hands overall.
I actually kept track separately for the situations where my stack is bigger, and where my stack is lower. (I'll quote myself when I find it)
You seem to be a bit confused about probabilities. 15000 games is an absolutely minute sample size. If you are an 80% favourite to win a hand, it does not mean that you will win 80% of the time over a small sample. Over millions of games yes, but not 15000.
Sorry bud, but I know a thing or two about probabilities, so unless your Math professor on some university I can't accept your view.
Maybe a 1% diff would be acceptable over 15.000; 0.5% would be normal.
But 4%? No
Try flipping a coin thousand times and see what happens.
I flipped it 5.000 times the other day to prove myself that I'm not crazy. Took me good 3 hours, and here's what I got (still have it written down on the comp):
1st 1000: 512:488 --> 1.2 % diff
2nd 1000: 520:480 --> 2% diff
3rd 1000: 499:501 --> 0.1% diff
4th 1000: 477:523 --> 2.3% diff
5th 1000: 504:496 --> 0.4% diff
whole 5000: 2512:2488 --> 0.24% diff
So how about 4% diff on 15.000 flips? Don't think so.
EDIT: There's one thing I forgot to mention. There's a ton of meaningless hands that I won which I shouldn't have (for example: I'm down to 100 chips after lost all in, and the blinds are 100/200).
Probably so I get the false sense of fairness overall. Those kind of hands I didn't include in my tracking.
Originally posted by NenadNacevic
And as I know when to push/fold I'm usually lower in chips when I'm all in vs some big stack bully who likes to call with anything. Why I'm winnig less hands overall.
This could be one of your problems like I was saying.
Stop focusing on analysing whether the game is rigged or not, and concentrate on your early and middle play. Analyse your hands at this stage and see if you can enter the late stage of the tourney with the bigger stack more often.
Also, how do you do on ICM trainer, are you at 95% or better consistently
Easy: 98%+
Average: 96%+
Hard: 81%+
and I did more then 8.000 of each (SnG Wizard)
...and see if you can enter the late stage of the tourney with the bigger stack more often.
I don't understand what you mean. I'm constantly making the right desitions based on the situations, chip counts and their stats on the PokerTracker.
I can't magically double myself up without making the wrong move, which I'm trying to avoid.
Also, all that have nothing to do with those 4%.
If I was supposed to have 10% ROI, but I have 6% over 15.000 games, that would be unacceptable. Even if I'd still be a winning player.
I switched sites 20 days ago and I'll show you the graph in few weeks when I get the right number of games played, to compare with the Stars graph and a few other sites.
So I'm back, with some graphs...
First a few words on the happenings after I left PokerStars around 2 months ago.
I went back to FullTilt (which was the site where I first stepped into poker waters) because I was offered a 400$-no-deposit bonus. Whoop-y-doodle-do.
Over the coarse of ~4.000 SnG's I approximately lost 7% more hands then I should have and only thing that kept me there was the bonus which was clearing rather quickly.
I think I already posted some examples from FullTilt in this thread.
So, when I was left with 100$ and down (that was with 360$ of the bonus cleared) I packed my bags and decided to stress no more...
...and I went to Merge. After a month of playing there, here is the graph.
Now, I know ~650 SnG's is nothing but bare in mind that I played WITHOUT PokerTracker because it couldn't be used on Merge Network.
They made it work since 1st of May, but I noticed few days ago and it's bugged for me when multi-tabling so still no PokerTracker.
I admit I was lucky at times, so I'll be conservative and say 10-ish% ROI would be realistic number. Few percent more when I get Tracker going...
So, 30 days there, had few small downswings and few upswings right after, to compensate. Chilling feeling, in a long time I wasn't that content.
And then my SharkScope subscription ran out...I left some money on Stars because if I withdraw from Merge to pay it I'll lose my Deposit Bonus.
I'll just put it short because I'm not patient enough:
Had 15$ there and tried to get it a bit up to pay the fee...and I lost all the money after ~30 1$ DoNs. Lost in every poss way...doesn't matter.
So, next day I remembered I had some FTP-s on FullTilt and I bought a ticket for Mini FTOPS on Sunday. Won 20$ and then tried to get some more for the fee...
Lost 14$ after 30 1$ SnG's where I lost 70% of the hands no matter how many times I dominated them.
One game I was heads up with 1650 vs 150 chips...went all in 4 times for the win where I was dominating him all 4 times (72%+) and lost all of them. Right.
And ran into AA fucking 6 times when I had JJ+ AT+ type of hands in the SB/Button.
And the rest of the money I lost on the rush tables by going all in with:
-QQ vs AA on 9TT board
-2 pairs vs set on a draw dry board
-2 pairs vs set on a draw dry board
Happens right? 30 peacefuller days on Merge then "suddenly" 2 dreadful days on Stars/Tilt in a row aye?
Lets see some graphs from those sites now.
I mean I know 0% is still not that bad but the graph should have gone the other direction.
And Tilt one:
Now I'm sure I wanted to add something more, but I'm sleepy and I'm going to bed.
ROI simulator
Using the following data
Your "True" ROI is 5%
You play 13149 games (your Stars record)
The chance of having a ROI of 1% or less < 0.1%
Your ROI at stars - 0%
Conclusions
Your "True" ROI is less than 5%
- - - - - - - - - - or - - - - - - - - - -
Pokerstars is rigged
Using the following data
Your "True" ROI is 3%
You play 4389 games (your Tilt record)
The chances of having a ROI of -3% or less - <0.1%
Your ROI at tilt - -4%
Conclusions
Your "True" ROI is less than 3%
- - - - - - - - - - or - - - - - - - - - -
Full Tilt is rigged
Originally posted by nibbana
ROI simulatorUsing the following data
The chance of having a ROI of 1% or less < 0.1%
Your ROI at stars - 0%Conclusions
- - - - - - - - - - or - - - - - - - - - -
Using the following data
Your "True" ROI is 3%
You play 4389 games (your Tilt record)The chances of having a ROI of -3% or less - <0.1%
Your ROI at tilt - -4%Conclusions
- - - - - - - - - - or - - - - - - - - - -
This, you might be slightly beating it, but you are in no way crushing it. Your sample size is fucking rediculous..
Or you have the sicket downswing in the whole history of poker.. But i think it's more likely that you ROI is very low to begin with...
I thought about this again though and using these simulators has it's limitations. It is the equivalent of saying that someone who is a winning player will never have a BE stretch of 10000 games when I know from reading on 2p2 and looking at peoples sharkscopes that this is very possible. You could look at it and say that the True ROI for the sample of 4389 games was 1% due to consistently horrible cards and setups, add to this getting outdrawn etc and it becomes possible but unlikely.
The thing that I find most unlikely is this though
Originally posted by NenadNacevic
I have to mention that I never tilt no matter what kind of bad beat happens
I don't know, maybe I'm not psychologically strong enough but I just don't believe that anybody NEVER tilts