Poker Articles

By Fox | Published Apr 12 2005, 11:49 PM
Recently the forums here on PocketFives.com have been infested with a terrible disease. For some reason people still believe the old conspiracy theory crap about non-random card distribution. Will all of the conspiracy theory nuts please raise your hands? Thank you, my assistant 2_cents will be around with tin foil lined hats for each of you so that Partypoker cannot read your mind during the rest of this little rant.

There are alot of reasons why I am certain the distribution of the cards is both random and fair, and I will discuss those in a few moments, but there seems to be one glaring omission from this discussion every time I see it on a forum thread...

There are thousands of watchdogs watching every site! That's right I'm one of them, and so is everyone else who uses pokertracker, pokeroffice, and tons of other lesser known programs. I have personally spoken to the creators of both pokertracker and poker-edge on the phone (both seem like fine people) and they have never seen anything other than a completely random distribution of cards. I personally have over 200,000 hands logged in pokertracker, and I can sort them in all kinds of different ways both within pokertracker or in a database program.

Let me say this slowly for those of you who may be differently abled...

Over a massive sample I get 22 with the same frequency as I get AA. I also get 52o with the same frequency as AKo. Whether I sort them by shorthanded, or the size of the blinds, or whether it was cloudy in Bangkok that day, the numbers still add up. Four flushes come exactly as often as they should even when I sort it by size of the blinds or size of the stacks. You can easily do it yourself by exporting your hand history files to a database program like Access or any of hundreds of free programs available for download, but anyone with that much basic understanding of numbers probably already knows better than to think the cards are juiced. How is that none of the people who believe the cards are juiced gets around to checking this stuff out and backing it up with numbers?

The sites are making millions of dollars which they would lose if one instance of non-random distribution were proven. Read about what happened to Planetpoker for proof of that. What reason do they have for doing this sort of thing? Risking their entire company to stimulate action? You've played this game before, there is more than enough action from terrible players.

The people who guarantee the randomness of the shuffle at the major sites are all very large companies who trade on their integrity being absolutely unquestionable. These are large corporations devoted entirely to assuring integrity. How much do you think a site is paying these people to lie, when it would destroy their careers and their company if they were caught by someone simply logging hands with pokertracker?

Occam's razor tells us that the simplest explanation is usually true (heavily paraphrased explanation of Occam's razor but it'll have to do). This leads me to believe that the problem is the human psyche. We remember the big hands more than the little ones, and the bad beats more than the times our hands held up. After all when was the last time someone cornered you in the local cardroom and told you a good beat story? I had aces hold up twice today now that I think about it, but I usually don't think about it unless they get cracked.

As for random distribution not being possible from a computer, try a regular deck of cards and a few shuffles. It's not nearly as close to random as the sites get. All that really matters is that the distribution is fair (my software tells me it is) and that it can't be predicted (which it can't be). Go read about how the sites seed their decks from the RNG (random number generator) and you'll see, it just can't be predicted.

Please people, for the sanity of all of us who have the ability to perform simple mathematical calculations, give up on the conspiracy theories. We could be spending this time learning how to play better and win more money instead of focusing on a baseless accusation that usually starts with "It seems like..."

I hope this helps sort out the issue for some of you. To the rest who simply don't believe in mathematics and logic I play under mr.fox on paradise, Mr_fox on party, and Mr_fox on UB, please put me on your friends list and join me at the tables, I'd love to play with you.

Well that ends my rant, If you would like information on how to check for the true randomness of the cards yourself simply get yourself a database program and learn how to use it. All of the party skins store your hand history files on your hard drive and you can import them into a databse program easily. Then simply sort them any way you like and see if you can find a pattern. If you do find a pattern take another prozac, put your tin foil hat back on and try it again. If you still find a pattern then you should be able to make at least 50 million dollars over the next year and I expect a small cut of that for providing the idea.

The truth is out there...
Fox

(From Adam)
For info on shuffling algorithms,
UB: http://www.ultimatebet.com/about-ub/rng.html
Paradise: http://www.paradisepoker.com/shuffling.html
Party: http://www.partypoker.com/about_us/rng.html  
Stars: http://www.pokerstars.com/security.html

(From BettinBenny)
Why are you so opposed to the word random? Sure, the shuffling on these sites is performed by an algorithm, but oftentimes (c.f. the posts listed by Adam) these algorithms include environmental noise, meaning that the placement of the cards is decided upon by particles moving in the atmosphere.

More importantly, shuffling performed during live play is also performed by an algorithm. It may change from hand to hand, but one particular algorithm might include, riffle twice, cut once, bridge three times, and cut again.

In my opinion, if you are going to make the claim that shuffling based on environmental noise is not random, you have to stipulate first that nothing is random, and that gets into a theological debate that really doesn't dictate the way in which we live.

For the purposes of this world, we have the illusion of free will and as such, an illusion (if nothing else) of randomness. I claim that shuffling based on environmental noise is just as "random" as shuffling based on the neurons in my brain deciding whether or not I want to riffle twice before I bridge the deck once.