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

Advanced statistics.

    • Tomaloc
      Tomaloc
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.01.2011 Posts: 7,033
      so well - if no one knows what is going on, and no one is actually privileged in the long run, does it matter? this feels like arguing that you could play 72o profitably, if only you knew when the flop would come 777
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by Tomaloc
      so well - if no one knows what is going on, and no one is actually privileged in the long run, does it matter? this feels like arguing that you could play 72o profitably, if only you knew when the flop would come 777

      Everyone has the same disadvantage is correct, the problem is obvious,

      suppose you start a 10,000 player MTT, at the start the timng of the random decks gives you good cards and you become stacked with chips, then for the entire second half of the MTT your timing of decks gives you 72 almost every hand.


      Poker is not running its natural path. The winners are winning by timing luck rather than skill, that is why we see ''donks'' winning Mtt's


      It is probabilities distributed uneven, only the very lucky will win.
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      added to try to clarify.

      The maths is simple ,

      if we have 1,000,000 random shuffled decks in a line, we have a 4524/1,000,000 chance of receiving pocket aces,

      if we are in a tournament and to make the final table we will see approx example - 800 hands.




      the probabilities of receiving a game winning sequence of aces are 4524/1,000,000^800



      Now if the tournament has 10,000 players, the odds suppose to be 1/10,000 standard and standard probability.

      Poker suppose to be a game based on skill and probability of receiving aces 1/221 hands ratio and not a game based on a random 1 /1,000,000 chance of receiving the correct deck.

      Consider aces lose 18% of the time, suppose by timing of the decks you were dealt the 18% of aces , 100% of the time.....or 100% at the wrong time

      I know my maths is not brilliant, but it shows the idea, I am currently looking at something in science called the Doomsday argument to try to relate the problem to this.
    • redskwerl
      redskwerl
      Black
      Joined: 03.03.2008 Posts: 3,813
      what is your point though? it seems like you're trying to show that there's luck in poker.. we already know that.
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by redskwerl
      what is your point though? it seems like you're trying to show that there's luck in poker.. we already know that.
      You do not get the point after all that?

      Poker suppose to be a game based on skill and probability of receiving aces 1/221 hands ratio and not a game based on a random 1 /1,000,000 chance of receiving the correct deck by timing of hands.

      That is a comparison to roulette , online poker is not poker because of this process, we are not even playing each other, we are just going through the motions according to distribution random timing of the decks, in another words we are wasting our time, it is outright gambling with little skill required.
    • redskwerl
      redskwerl
      Black
      Joined: 03.03.2008 Posts: 3,813
      i still don't get it. your posts read like the ramblings of a madman. are you saying there is no skill in poker?
      no skill in a game means that it is impossible to make a mistake. let's say you have the absolute nuts on the river, you are heads-up, and your opponent goes all-in. are you saying calling and folding are equally correct is this situation?
    • Tomaloc
      Tomaloc
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.01.2011 Posts: 7,033
      but how much did you lose?
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by Tomaloc
      but how much did you lose?
      I do not know how much I have lost over several years, the money does not really interest me, I wanted a title.

      The monies won or lost is not the issue, the bad distribution is.
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by redskwerl
      i still don't get it. your posts read like the ramblings of a madman. are you saying there is no skill in poker?
      no skill in a game means that it is impossible to make a mistake. let's say you have the absolute nuts on the river, you are heads-up, and your opponent goes all-in. are you saying calling and folding are equally correct is this situation?
      No not at all, your skill accounts for very little on the internet because it is all timing based.
    • Lazza61
      Lazza61
      Headadmin
      Headadmin
      Joined: 23.03.2011 Posts: 10,857
      Hey shatteredaces,

      I beg to differ most strongly. The skill in poker comes about due to the WAY you play your cards against that random distribution of hands.

      The measure of a good poker player is not in the hands he plays, but in the hands he lays down. I'll even post my fave:



      Btw, why are you trying to apply order to randomness

      Cheers for a riveting discussion :s_thumbsup:

      Laz
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by Lazza61
      Hey shatteredaces,

      I beg to differ most strongly. The skill in poker comes about due to the WAY you play your cards against that random distribution of hands.

      The measure of a good poker player is not in the hands he plays, but in the hands he lays down. I'll even post my fave:



      Btw, why are you trying to apply order to randomness

      Cheers for a riveting discussion :s_thumbsup:

      Laz
      Thank you for the post and the video link of an interesting cooler hand. I can not comment on the video with it being short of the pre-flop action etc, at a glance maybe the player with full boat jacks, was worried about pocket pair aces.


      I understand very well knowing when to hold them or to fold them, I understand poker is more than just the cards, example - the other night I called a utg raise and a caller whilst on the button. I was not playing my cards but the players, the flop T,A,2 all spades, both players checked, I checked behind, the turn card Q of spades.
      both players check again, 4 spades I fired in a good seized bet to rep the flush. Utg folds, the mid position player folds and shows he had the straight.

      I had 72 of hearts.

      I am not trying to apply order to randomness, I am trying to apply that stacking piles of decks can not work and give a fare time based distribution of probabilities.

      If you can imagine a circle, north of the circle is the deck shuffler, south of the circle is all the tables, east of the circle is decks stacked up waiting to be dealt, west of the circle is returning decks to the shuffler, and the circle is in a continuous loop.

      If you can now imagine the east of the circle , the decks waiting surround another circle that is rotating, from this rotation you randomly receive your deck to your table, a random deck that is pre-shuffled and has a set unknown sequence.

      If 1,000,000 decks of cards were individually shuffled, the estimate ratio of you seat position receiving aces is 4524/1,000,000/t where t equals time.

      If 1,000,000 decks are randomly distributed by time to random tables, then your seat position odds of receiving pocket aces are x/t where x is random and t is time.

      You have no probabilities what so ever.

      added - also do not forget your table technically spins also per go, with the button move, so you spin and technically the decks may as well spin because the other tables make this effect.
    • Lazza61
      Lazza61
      Headadmin
      Headadmin
      Joined: 23.03.2011 Posts: 10,857
      Hey shatteredaces,

      Only FullTilt apply a time concept to their card distribution. This is called random shuffling so even between streets the cards are being consistently shuffled.

      I have heard a million conspiracy theorists argue that you need to time your action. Doing this opens you to random probabilities based on your perception of the timing involved which is irrelevant because even that is random.

      Why do you think 1.000.000 decks is finite. Because it simply isn't.


      Regards

      Laz
    • redskwerl
      redskwerl
      Black
      Joined: 03.03.2008 Posts: 3,813
      Originally posted by shatteredaces
      Originally posted by redskwerl
      i still don't get it. your posts read like the ramblings of a madman. are you saying there is no skill in poker?
      no skill in a game means that it is impossible to make a mistake. let's say you have the absolute nuts on the river, you are heads-up, and your opponent goes all-in. are you saying calling and folding are equally correct is this situation?
      No not at all, your skill accounts for very little on the internet because it is all timing based.
      so what you're saying is, that if you are dealt cards because of "timing" (as you call it), as opposed to getting dealt the same cards from a true random generator, your skill in the game decreases? why?
      everything is the same for the players. they get the same cards with the same probabilities and they have the same strategic options. the players can't tell the difference.
      it doesn't matter what method (algorithm) the site uses, as long as it creates a nice uniform distribution of cards, and the players can't predict the output, the method is just as good as a true random generator.
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by Lazza61
      Hey shatteredaces,

      Only FullTilt apply a time concept to their card distribution. This is called random shuffling so even between streets the cards are being consistently shuffled.

      I have heard a million conspiracy theorists argue that you need to time your action. Doing this opens you to random probabilities based on your perception of the timing involved which is irrelevant because even that is random.

      Why do you think 1.000.000 decks is finite. Because it simply isn't.


      Regards

      Laz

      I think you may misunderstand what I have said. Lets me try to clarify it for you, 1-5 random shuffled, 1-5 are the variants to a set, 1-5 is a ''block'' group of random that will over time repeat the same values and over infinite time all the numbers over time will have an even amount of time they are drawn.

      You always have a 1/5 chance of guessing the drawn number where as the dealer odds change each go, if the dealer deals a number 1, their probability of drawing another 1 the next go increase, 5^2, where as your odds always remain 1/5.
      A reverse probability and not a gamblers fallacy, when someone says 0 on a roulette wheel as got to come, they are essentially correct, over time it will make an appearance, no dissimilar to receiving pocket aces, that is why probabilities work of the means average.

      All probability games, has the function of sequences made by per go, or per shuffle , although the values are unknown, you win or lose dependent on good or bad timing of your choice bet.

      This is a standard probability game, poker differs in that once the cards are shuffled, and the deck is set, the cards that are set, are set to seat position, so although you do not know that the 8th card is an ace, if it is set there, and your seat is aligned to the deal position, you are guaranteed that ace.

      If you can now imagine the 1-5 again shuffled, this time there is 5 players who in turn are distributed one of the random variants, out of the 5 numbers , only number 3 is a win.

      your odds are 1/5 of winning each go.

      now imagine 1,000,000 of blocks of 1-5, and they are already all shuffled, your odds are no longer 1-5 because the setting of the shuffle has predefined the results to all seats,

      In this example we have 100 turns

      player 1 wins 10%
      player 2 wins 10%
      player 3 wins 20%
      player 4 wins 5%
      player 5 wins 55%

      The sequences that are set unknowingly look like this -

      12345
      21345
      12453
      12345
      25413
      54213
      24153
      etc.


      This is based on a single table of 5 players.

      now add another 4 tables, so 5 tables in total, the results will be very different, you would need ''more luck'' to receive a winning sequence,you could in essence receive all decks that are a loss and have no 3 in your position.

      the odds are something like 1/5/1,000,000/5

      You are not relying on just the shuffle to put a winning sequence in your path over time, you are also relying on a 1,000,000 deck roulette wheel to give you a deck that as the set sequence that gives you a win.

      the luck of the timing is essential in poker, nobody wants to time bad decks in a later stage of a MTT.

      The cards and the randomness suppose to run its natural path, based on one deck, a muti deck system does not allow an even probability distribution over periods of time.

      12345
      21345
      12453
      12345
      25413
      54213
      24153
      etc.

      This represents a single deck and single table, now imagine the distribution pattern if by timing the decks were chosen random, in this instant player 5, gets deck 1 and 4.
    • htghguuh
      htghguuh
      Silver
      Joined: 02.01.2014 Posts: 149
      Thats cool ,but if u continue playing the deck u wont win basically,As in brick poker its different ,
      everyone has there own ,
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by htghguuh
      Thats cool ,but if u continue playing the deck u wont win basically,As in brick poker its different ,
      everyone has there own ,
      Yes exactly that , in the bricks and mortar poker everyone has their own deck per table, and if a new deck comes to the table it is shuffled, and remains a fare game, probabilities remain the same and the distribution is even over a time period. You run consistent if you are good player, online process kills any consistency
    • GoOnCal1
      GoOnCal1
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.01.2015 Posts: 590
      Yes, but what if the dealer fell over, and the deck got reshuffled, or another deck was brought in, wouldn't this ruin your predestined AA in position 3 on table 6?

      Then one guy always bends the aces so they sit up when re-dealt, 2 other guys are sharing hole card information, another guy palms chips when he goes all in, the dealers flat mate is sitting on the table and the other two guys have camera phones sitting on the table to see under the deal. Upstairs 2 guys are hacking the wireless security camera's and that hot bird who just brushed past you has lifted your wallet. I know where I would rather play, besides I can do it without bothering to wear trousers.

      You have an argument for your belief, but where is the evidence?
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by GoOnCal1
      Yes, but what if the dealer fell over, and the deck got reshuffled, or another deck was brought in, wouldn't this ruin your predestined AA in position 3 on table 6?

      Then one guy always bends the aces so they sit up when re-dealt, 2 other guys are sharing hole card information, another guy palms chip when he goes all in, the dealers flat mate is sitting on the table and the other two guys have camera phones sitting on the table to see under the deal. Upstairs 2 guys are hacking the wireless security camera's and that hot bird who just brushed past you has lifted your wallet. I know where I would rather play, besides I can do it without bothering to wear trousers.

      You have an argument for your belief, but where is the evidence?

      A dealer falling over at a table or a misdeal does not happen every hand in a live game, those are 1 off incidents on different occasions, and are negligible. I feel the evidence is the maths and the explanation that goes with the maths and the very simple axiom logic I have already mentioned. It should not be even a hard issue to fix for programmers, tag a table I.D to each deck and return the same deck to the same table, a few second delay between hands, and compensate for this by taking off time bank time of each player so the game continues at speed.
    • GoOnCal1
      GoOnCal1
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.01.2015 Posts: 590
      Cheers Shattered,
      You are still confusing argument (logic? and probability) with evidence (hand histories and statistics). IF your argument is true, there must be evidence. Where is it?

      Who else other than yourself believes this proposition? ( try to find some-one with some credibility )

      This is a serious question for you to consider, your task should not be to convince others but to re-examine your proposition in the face of all evidence being contra to your argument. The inability to let go an idea in the face of solid evidence to the contrary is said to be 'delusion'. We all suffer fleeting misconceptions, but stubbornly adhering to them can be seriously harmful.

      I sincerely urge you to reconsider your idea that there are systematic problems with the random allocation of cards in online poker.

      Regards Michael
      :heart:
    • shatteredaces
      shatteredaces
      Basic
      Joined: 15.04.2015 Posts: 141
      Originally posted by GoOnCal1
      Cheers Shattered,
      You are still confusing argument (logic? and probability) with evidence (hand histories and statistics). IF your argument is true, there must be evidence. Where is it?

      Who else other than yourself believes this proposition? ( try to find some-one with some credibility )

      This is a serious question for you to consider, your task should not be to convince others but to re-examine your proposition in the face of all evidence being contra to your argument. The inability to let go an idea in the face of solid evidence to the contrary is said to be 'delusion'. We all suffer fleeting misconceptions, but stubbornly adhering to them can be seriously harmful.

      I sincerely urge you to reconsider your idea that there are systematic problems with the random allocation of cards in online poker.

      Regards Michael
      :heart:
      Thank you for your post, my idea is that there are systematic errors in the deck distribution, I do not think the rng is not random.

      The evidence is essentially the maths, the maths does not lie, regardless of hand histories, which people can check their own.

      1,000,000 random distributed decks, 1/1,000,000 chance of receiving a wining deck etc, it does not work and can not work.

      I wish I knew a pro player who would understand this......

      It is not hard to imagine 2 roulette wheel, 1 with 9 variants and one with 52 variants, to win you simply have to guess what number on each wheel will line up randomly when the wheels stop spinning randomly. The game would have huge odds.


      1/9 for the first wheel , 1/52 for the second wheel, odds of the combined wheels beyond me.

      the formation you should receive

      12345
      21345
      12453
      12345
      25413
      54213
      24153

      likely formation online

      12345
      21345
      12453
      12345
      25413
      54213
      24153