This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

FT's RNG some people might find that interesting

  • 6 replies
    • OZSA
      Joined: 18.05.2009 Posts: 804
      ye i knew this, took me like a week of mailing with FT like a year ago till they finally replied and explained every action of their rng system :D
    • elhh82
      Joined: 03.09.2008 Posts: 6,838
      Interesting read:

      The actual process is that basically there are banks of decks.
      There is a 52 card deck, a 51 card deck, etc. More correctly,
      there are banks of unique indices, 0..51, 0..50, etc.

      As some examples, when the down cards are ready to be dealt to a full table,
      the table would ask for 18 cards from a 52 card deck.
      18 random cards are selected using a Knuth algorithm from a 52 card deck.
      The actual random numbers are selected from a hardware TRNG (not a PRNG)
      meaning it is TRULY random on a quantum physics level. This source
      is XOR'ed against an PRNG as a failsafe against hardware malfunction.
      The process of obtaining the 18 cards from the 52 card deck caused
      the deck itself to be reordered.

      Hence, the next request for cards from the 52 card deck would start
      with a different initial state than the previous request.

      The request for cards returns 18 unique indices between 0 and 51.

      Now, when it comes time to deal the flop, the table asks for 3 cards
      from a 34 card deck. The table knows what cards are left in it's own
      deck. All the RNG returns is 3 indices between 0 and 33, which are
      used to pick from the remaining cards in the table's deck.
      Again, the process of choosing these new indices causes the 34 card deck
      (or more correct, the set of indices from 0 to 33) to be reordered.

      This means that all tables are basically shuffling decks for each other,
      and that the timing of the hand affects the outcome (in two ways... first,
      the TRNG itself will return different results depending on when it
      is queried, because it is not a PRNG and is stateless... it's is truly
      random... second, even if the TRNG returned the same numbers, other tables
      could have modified the state of the indices before you made your

      And yes, this effectively makes rabbit hunting useless. I actually like
      this. It removes any guilt about folding a hand. You can't say
      "I would have won had I called preflop" because the board would have
      been different.

    • thazar
      Joined: 14.09.2009 Posts: 6,561
      my immediate impression was to feel a bit cheated that the deck is still shuffled when the hand has started and cards have been dealt. :f_biggrin: .

      It just does not matter. Now i think when I suck out damn: I should have waited 1 more second before pushing :D
    • OZSA
      Joined: 18.05.2009 Posts: 804
      u know there's one bad thing with this shuffling...if ur pessimist, and u always blame urself in life, at full tilt, you can blame urself for something that you cant control, yet, still it was ur mistake..lets say u got AA vs KK, u instacall and K shows up, but what if u waited 3more seconds, maybe then the K wouldnt come... so you can constantly blame urself for loosing coz of ur own fault...damn thats just good masochism :) ))
      ok, hope nobody is doing this...just said it, as an option:)
    • Ramble
      Joined: 17.11.2008 Posts: 1,460
      FullTilt also has a blurb about their RNG on their website - but nothing technical...
    • thazar
      Joined: 14.09.2009 Posts: 6,561
      Originally posted by Ramble
      FullTilt also has a blurb about their RNG on their website - but nothing technical...
      I read that before but the part that I found interesting in the discussion quoted above is that the cards are still be shuffled once the hand has started