1. This entire thread is ridiculous and all of you are looking for a reason to justify your losses
    Add Reynolds XO to Rail
  2. this numbers looks fine for me

    but AawwNutz numbers if I got right they from 40.000 hands ,they are scary... shouldnt be like that..
    Add GusTheHun to Rail
  3. Why do the percentages not add to 100?

    Uhh, because they're measuring distinct, independent events?
    Add Games Geek to Rail
  4. I lol'd

    BTW, I asked for the same report from Stars. Looks like I win 40.7% of my flipz. Super. On another note, can we get someone like McLEOD to ask for this report? O/U on him winning 75%?
    Add Mkind16 to Rail
  5. FWIW, looking over my pokertracker databases, I'm beginning to think you need a LOT more than 100,000 hands for things like this to start to even out. You see all kinds of statistical deviations in how many times you get certain hands and whatnot (i.e. AQs quite a bit more than AKs or something like that) until you get to maybe...oh I dunno I'm no mathematician but I'd take a shot in the dark and say 200,000-250,000 hands?

    100k hands is more than enough to figure out if you're a winner, but the long run REALLY IS very long.

    And this is cash, mind you. Tournaments must be far worse.
    Add Edals to Rail
  6. 40,000 hands is NOTHING.

    He couldn't even get 100 coinflip situations from that many hands. This is the data you are using to say that "Stars is rigged."

    BTW, I run way worse on UB than I do on any other site. IS UB RIGGED? Maybe over the 20,000 or so hands I've played there we can garner sufficient data to conclude that it is.
    Add warden to Rail
  7. I think , is propably more than 100 coinflip...

    AawwNutz : HOW MANY ???
    Add GusTheHun to Rail
  8. You are such a joke.
    Add sixhigh to Rail
  9. I am not a math man, and I mostly play on Bodog, but I think that anyone who has played long enough should have some suspicion as to how RANDOM everything really is.

    When the same flops hit, and the same suited cards are dealt to all three tables at the same time, and your KK runs into AA simultaneously on two tables (twice in an hour) - it makes you more than wonder.

    It goes in patterns: certain sets will hit, or flushes, or overpairs getting 2 outed by underpairs, etc....Anyone who has played long enough has experienced this "phenomenon". It would seem like the sites are messing with the ratios, sometimes, doesn't it? Who's checking?

    The thing is that a lot of people don't grasp is that this still makes it RANDOM for everyone, but random in the sense of who the sites decide to screw over at what particular time.

    A lot of people on here make most of decisions based on experience, and I am one of them. I understand variance and EV fairly well, and my EXPERIENCE tells me that there is a good chance something is up - and not just on Pokerstars.

    Mathematically it makes sense for the sites to set up action, at least in tournaments. The faster they get over, the sooner another one can start. And although they make much more off of the cash game rake, they do make good money off of tournament buy-ins as well.

    The funny thing is that there is not much of a percentage of people claiming "rigged" who will ever stop playing, so ultimately this just becomes a perpetual discussion of variance and specific instances of bad luck.

    What can we prove? Nothing.

    Just try and donk-dodge, and cross your fingers that the site didn't pick you to win their "Bust-out Lottery" on the particular hand you're playing.

    Add Gambit to Rail
  10. Can I see your statistical analysis? Post your numbers and I'll run it around and see if it is statistically significant.
    Add kmil420 to Rail
  11. I have a lot of respect for Nutz. He is right. Stars is fucked. It Hates the trap move real BAD. Somebody said stars doesn't like reasonable people. Bottom line is that i have won money everywhere except stars. It sucks when Stars seems like the only option. Lately i have played, with sucess at PlayersOnly, Full Tilt, and the Orleans Open $500 event. If somebody believes Stars is Fucked for them, they have usually seen enough poker to know the dif. People who flame, without experiencing, first hand, the NO ESCAPE FROM VARIENCE routine, probably will have tough times when they turn up at a REAL site.

    Stars DOES ALLOW some people to play better than they are. If a person can set back and predict 2,3, 4 outers before they occur, watch as the sickening bullshit happens, then something ain't right.

    Those who talk crap about nutz crying can all go play some more poker. wipe the snot out of your noses and try to learn something about stars bullshit. Otherwise just sit back keep the blind eye, and hope you don't see me sitting on your left anywhere else besides stars.
    Add Tim G to Rail
  12. Hilarious. I was about to write "What about afink" then I saw you've already claimed your prize.
    Add Camronius to Rail
  13. well here is one for then. I think full tilt is WAAAYYY more rigged than stars
    Add dthimesch to Rail
  14. I think everyone forgets how statistics work. Statistics and math say that most players will fall pretty close to the averages, but definitely say that some players will fall on the outside.

    Yes, Awww is way on the outside here, but not to an unacceptable level statistically. Yes, it has to really suck for him that, no matter what he does, he seems to be playing behind the 8 ball. It also won't neccessarily fix itself (it probablly will slightly over time, but he's not guaranteed a hella good run to fix this.

    Do I think it's rigged, no. That being said, if it is rigged, it actually made sense to do it, since they became the biggest site, so I wouldn't have blamed them.

    But, I really think that Stars is fine, I'm with Lenny here.
    Add lordxixor101 to Rail
  15. I thought I was unlucky. But you sir take the price. I did the same thng as you did. Contacted pokerstars. This is the answer.

    <pre>The report covers the period from June 24th, and you are running slightly
    unluckily here. Your winning percentage of 46% with overcards is pretty
    close to the expected number, but 46% with the pair is a little below
    expected. Something like 53% with a pair and 47% with the overcards is
    pretty typical.

    And I thought I was unlucky..
    Add andersd to Rail
  16. That is the major problem with RANDOMNESS, it is just so damm RANDOM.
    Add xTEDFORRESTx to Rail
  17. well......ill never get that 30 min of my life back......
    Add DcHustler to Rail
  18. "do you believe in evolution? what is your take on the history of man? do you whole-heartedly believe in something that has not been proven or dis-proven in life?"

    no offense, really... but you're not smart, dude. just listen to games geek. and dont try to get into some pissing contest with him about this or anything else involving knowledge/debate. you're over your head.

    anyone else that thinks games geek is wrong, especially that dude that first brought up... enron??? same thing applies.
    Add Ozzie to Rail
  19. Instead of focusing your frustration on Stars, try asking yourself:

    "What is it I'm doing that makes god hate me?"

    Be honest. He knows when you're lying.
    Add wny2nyc47 to Rail
  20. I've had my doubts before, but the bottom line is this:

    It could be the case that these really bad runs, which attract so much attention, are variance.

    It could be the case that Stars has it in for you - <span>royally. </span>I mean, seriously...it's like they have the magnifying glass trained on you, focusing it in and out, laughing as you flail about helplessly, having no idea the cause of your perpetual anguish. They talk about it at the Stars' Thursday Happy Hour, slapping their knees at the latest post from this guy who obviously doesn't know when to walk away from an obv bad situation.

    If this was some kind of conspiracy, no one will ever produce a sample size big enough to smash Stars' credibility or change 10% of the player's minds on the issue. On a bad day, they'll swear it was rigged. On a good day, they'll be embarrassed they thought it.

    That's the nature of a game that involves money and luck boys.

    Stop wracking your brain about it and move on.
    Add wny2nyc47 to Rail
  21. Honestly, Games Geek, I am puzzled how my statement: "But to say it is not rigged with no proof is just as stupid as saying it is with no proof" is an indication that I misunderstand fundamental logic. Could you explain this to me? If I have made an error in logic here, I don't see it. For me to blindly accept that I am getting a fair game from a site because they say I am seems just as stupid as saying that it is not a fair game without evidence to support that claim.

    Sorry for the change in text. The copy and paste screwed things up and don't wanna spend the time to fix it.
    Add Suicydal to Rail
  22. Honestly, Games Geek, I am puzzled how my statement: "But to say it is not rigged with no proof is just as stupid as saying it is with no proof" is an indication that I misunderstand fundamental logic. Could you explain this to me? If I have made an error in logic here, I don't see it. For me to blindly accept that I am getting a fair game from a site because they say I am seems just as stupid as saying that it is not a fair game without evidence to support that claim.
    Add Suicydal to Rail
  23. it's just as stupid to say unicorns dont exist as to say they do... neither can be proven.
    Add Ozzie to Rail
  24. OP, if you have a lot of data from your results I would love to have it so I can do a real statistical analysis and see if there is any validation to your claims of <span>rigged</span>
    Add kmil420 to Rail
    Add iuschmeltz to Rail
  26. agree w/ jurollo....you are basically getting at what my theory on pokerstars is.

    A handicapping system.

    The software tracks player tendencies...
    from deposit amounts,
    typical session lengths and times,
    hand preference tendencies,
    betting patterns (does he know when to slow play, when to fastplay, is he capable of "making moves" on a regular basis?, )
    things like...."if this player busts out here is he more likely to log off or register for that 27.00 freezeout he has the lobby opened for that starts in 10 minutes",
    If this player goes through 2 buyins on bad beats and has 8 buyins left is he more likely to a) quit b) keep grinding c) step down a limit or d) take the rest of his roll and sit at 5/10 NL
    Is this player more likely to deposit if he loses half of his account in a week or is he more likely to withdraw or shipswap w/ another player for money on another site?

    Games Geek, it would be pretty easy and very valuable to a site to program the software to "profile" each player like this....ie pokerstars probably knows 99 percent of its players gambling tendencies 5 times better than they do. Now once you have this information...it would be easy to have the information from the betting patterns and hand selection portion of that profile to assign each player a "handicap"....so that when a very bad player is against a better player the odds are shifted slightly in his favor. This would explain why when you try to trap overly aggressive idiots (not LAGs....LAGtards) they always seem to flop 992 when you smooth called w/ AA cause u knew they'd shove the flop)...and why in tourneys full of good players u dont see as many bad beats cause the handiaps are equal.+
    Add trailerAces to Rail
  27. Let me start by saying that I have been playing online poker since late 04, beginning of 05, and got my start on Paradise poker where I was one of the people to play a freeroll and grind it up to some decent winnings. Let me also say that I do not think I am anything great in online poker. However I believe I am a solid player that has made money in this game and I play relatively low limits starting with $10 and ranging up to the $10 rebuys and $30 tourneys but usually dont invest more than $50 in a tourn. To some of you that might not make my opinion valid but I dont give a fuck bc I think many p5ers fall into this category rather than the $100 and over tourn players. I probably could have a bigger bankroll but I make pretty consistent cashouts as I like to use the money to some real world use. Let me also say that my bread n butter are the $20 sit n gos on stars and that is where I grind away.

    In the time I played on paradise I won about 15 tournaments. Mostly lower limits and I am including the 5 tourn wins I had in the onyx hokie private tournament series which usually never had more then 80-100 players. So lets not even count those so lets say 10 tourn. I have been playing on stars for over a year when I deposited $50 last summer and have been able build up, cash out, rinse and repeat and have not had to redeposit since then. I have won ZERO NLHE mtt tournaments on stars. ZERO. No 180 mans, no big mtts....ZERO. Just one PLO tournament. Ive been able to consistently build with final table cashes and sit n go grindage but have not won. For the life of me I cannot win a nlhe mtt on stars and I know I am capable. I am 10x the tournament player now then when I played on dise. Obv sometimes I make mistakes but I sincerely believe I have what it takes to win as I have before and I have confidence in my game.

    My point? I believe it is possible to just run bad on one site and I see sick shit happen over and over again to me. I keep my mouth shut because I dont like to bitch but it truly bothered me when ppl were getting over aaaawnutz's case. The reason being is I became a member here at p5s in june of 05 when the posts were littered with extrememly talented players and the discussions were insightful and full of poker knowledge. Aaaawnutz was one of these players and was successful on Paradise poker. So all you ppl that think hes a moron just shut up cuz it makes you look dumb to people who know the contributor to p5s and poker player he is. Just cuz hes not some laggy 22 yr old you young ppl jump on him (Im 24) and dismiss his opinion. Get a clue.

    I think it is totally possible to run like shit on a site because in the back of my head I think I run like SHIT on stars. I dont say shit and just keep on truckin but reading nutz's post sounded very familiar. I understand variance I understand all that shit as I have been around and seen tons and tons of hands. So save the variance talk cuz I get it. Shit, I fucking really hope it is variance bc if that is the case I have a some sick good stuff coming my way. But I have been so fucking deep in so many tournies to see gay shit happen too many times. I am saying it. I do not run good on stars. I would love to see how I can do on Tilt but dont deposit cuz I dont even wanna bother with that epassporte shit and I love the tourn selection and software on stars, just wish I ran better....

    I am more of a lurker then a poster but sometimes I have to vent when I read the negativity that is spewed on this site to ppl stating their opinion.

    Flame away......
    Add xxACES UPxx to Rail
  28. gamesgeek u spent a lot of this thread arguing theory vs theory, what is the point? no one here has any proof or factual evidence at this point

    the only thing i truly learned from this thread is that gamesgeek is a pokerstars employee
    Add acp to Rail

    they are called outliers
    Add acp to Rail
  30. obv i own at poker and i cant win on stars either

    maybe i run bad there? maybe their structure doesnt suit my style? who knows, ill keep on truckin also
    Add Cmoney3 to Rail
Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 62 3 4 5 6

Similar Threads