Announcements
** July Nap's Competition Result : 1st Rainbow, 2nd Trainmad091, 3rd Zidane123, KO Cup Bathtime For Rupert, Most Winners Alastair, Goodwood Comp: Glavintoby**
**July Poker League Result : 1st Craggwood £75, 2nd Like2Fish £45, 3rd Rivrd £30**
York Ebor Festival Tipster Competition : 19th August - 22nd August

polo321

New Members
  • Content Count

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by polo321

  1. i'm not going to make any comments regarding this.just let the facts speak for themselves http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-hands/Boom/3526399_B66354584E
  2. Re: Classic pokerstars this is the best explanation i found about the reality of playing on pokerstars,that the variance argument doesn't stack up when the maths are compared to the true odds of event happening and the improbability of losing every hand you enter and i mean every hand that you have the best preflop best on the flop only to lose that runner runner flush that miracle one outer,that set he made on the turn, POKERSTARS IS BULL****E DO NOT PLAY THERE I've played a lot of poker. And I do mean a lot. I learned the game in my early teens and was making enough money in cash games by the time I hit College age to pay my own fees. Now, I became a responsible adult and was convinced by my now ex-wife to stop playing high stakes, so Poker became a friendly hobby for me - house games at $5/pot and such. Very occasionally, I'd still wander into the local Poker Room to have a twirl on the tables, and still generally made money. Then, the Poker Explosion happened, the various books came out, and the tables filled up with a variety of Bingo Donkeys, Big Hand Checkers and SuperSystem Addicts. The cash games (at the bankroll level I was willing to play - lower than before thanks to mortgage, kids, business, etc...) became exercises in maths, not as much fun and definitely not worth the effort. So, I cut back further. Eventually, after divorce, and finding myself with more free time of an evening but even less money than before, I decided to try my hand at Online Poker. Various sites were tried, and I settled on PokerStars, for a variety of reasons but the main one being the sheer number of people playing meant a Sit'N'Go was filled within minutes most of the time. I admit, I've done financially well out of the site over the last 8 years, relatively speaking. I play at the lowest few levels of SNGs, for the most part. I'm experienced enough to spot most players' range within a few hands, and I keep copious notes for future reference in any case. I generally play 2 or 3 hours at a time, up to 4 times a week, though I sometimes go through long periods of not having the time or the inclination. There has always been one major source of consternation for me - how the site allows any player to play an infinite number of tables simultaneously. As I say, I'm quite experienced, and can keep tabs on up to 8 tables at a time, although it does mean playing entirely to a system, not playing the other players but the maths. It's not particularly enjoyable to do this, however, so I usually restrict myself to 2 - 4 concurrent games. Yet, there are accounts which are regularly registered for 20+ tables. Indeed, when a new table opens, they will be the first to register - implying some form of macro or code running in the lobby. Their play reflects a "bot" mentality - limping for value, flat calling with rag Aces, shoving for next to no fold-value with anything like a Group 1 hand (or often just a pocket pair). These Multi-Table Shove Donkeys, as I refer to them in my own notes, clearly cannot be human-operated beyond setting parameters in a handling program. An enormous percentage of them (appr 85% in my estimation) come from Russia, or at least are registered as such. And their numbers have ballooned in the last year. They are not, however, as big a problem as the other group... These are what would in cash games be referred to as Dumb Gamblers. They flat call preflop with any 2 cards, and once they see a flop they wont fold anything like a hand - be it a two-outer undercarded straight, a runner-runner weak flush draw, bottom pair, any court, any two suited rags, a single overcard - to any bet. In other words, they play 10% chance hands 100% of the time.They never instigate a shove, but they always call them, regardless of their odds. AND THEY WIN appr 50% OF THE TIME IN A SHOWDOWN. Never mind the fact that they shouldn't have played their hand preflop, no sane person would call the bets they do on the flop. AND YET THE STILL WIN 50% of the time. For those of you who aren't good at maths, this is a contrary statistical result of 400%. In other words, a total fluke when it happens once, a sign that something is subverting the Laws of Probability when it happens with such regularity. This leads me to believe that these accounts are either: (a) Shills for PokerStars - or - (b) Using a code hack which allows them to see the Turn and River before they are revealed Personally, I'm inclined towards (a), despite the protestations of others that there is no reason for PokerStars to scam low-bankroll players. They run many thousands of Freerolls and Promotional Tourneys every month. The money has to come from somewhere. Although (b) is probably the more frightening scenario. Either way, their effect, combined with that of the MTSDs I discussed above, is to turn the game of Poker into a coin-toss every hand. If I wanted to gamble any amount of money on a coin-toss, I wouldn't bother paying somebody else for the privilege. I am closing my account as of today, when I played 11 single-table tourneys, never entered a hand without value, engaged in minimal bluffing, and yet took 47 beats by hands that were 13% or less against my cards at the point of the last bet, including pocket AA being beaten 3 times by rivered quads. Anybody who wants to see my Playing History for detail can contact me. GO BACK TO YOUR LOCAL POKER ROOM. At least there you can punch any cheats in the face.
  3. Re: Classic pokerstars go and play the 1/2 limit at pokerstars and see how you get on,there is variance and there is pokerstars variance--two different concepts,
  4. Re: Classic pokerstars hope this open a few eyes to the reality of online poker
  5. Re: Classic pokerstars classic pokerstars pokerstars consumer support typical downward swing on stars the same just quicker
  6. Re: Classic pokerstars ok this is the story i put 100 dollars into PS and manage over a couple weeks to grind it up to 750 my AA and my kk all held up same as my two pair and sets and the odd fullhouse.i played a conservative game nothing too wild just trying to get in with the best hand, pretty stantard stuff. Then i made a fatal mistake i withdraw all my funds for the upcoming Chelthenam festival to have nice bankroll to back the horses that i was tracking thru the year.in my naivaity i thought i could grind it back up deposited 100 lost it in two nights ,ok it is only variance my AA ND KK SMASHED flushes beaten by higher on the river and so on, deposit another 100 dollars tightened my game up played only jj or better .still every hand i played i mean every hand had the best it on the flop and get out drawn on the river.lost fifteen hands on the river in one night . ok this a downswing just got to stick with it, stuck in another 100 dollars the thought never accord to me that there was something wrong with site.really tightened up bet only when i thought i had the best of it but the runner runner kept coming this kind of situation kept cropping up numerous time( scruffy897)sb dealt 10 7 ---- bb AK FLOP 10 10 7 TURN A RIVER A can you honestly blame me for suspecting that there something wrong with the site. within a month a half i went from a winning payer to a uber fish nothing held up. so i trawled the internet to see if anyone else had this kind of experience and there are thousands upon thousands who have worse stories than me. Went on to other forums and the same pattern appears anyone who dare to question the interity of PS is automatically catorgrised as fish with no clue of strategy that they have no valid reason to hold that point of veiw.it easy to call someone a fish without knowing the full facts.i came across some very sad stories because of this site people losing marriages, houses, people grinding 12-14 hours a day chasing their loses. was watching a high stakes the other night sb raises bb calls flop A A 10 both players raise each other until all money is in the middle $43000 in the pot bb turns over AK sb turns 10 10 and just thought what a perfect set up.
  7. Re: Classic pokerstars wow you made a graph GOLD STAR to you still doesn't explain the deviation in 70/30 situations where the lesser hand wins 41% of the time more than 10% than it should still doesn't explain why Ax v Ax the ace appears 30% more than it should .The logical explaination is that it induces action yet your head is firmly planted in the sand you have losr all perspective no matter what evidence was put in front of you, you would still defend this site to the hilt. my instinct and my logic tells me when you afraid play AA OR KK BECAUSE YOU KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO GET SCREWED that there something fundamental wrong with the site. .
  8. Re: Classic pokerstars please read this and make your own mind up. This was not meant to be a bad beat thread just a warning to people not invest large sums of money into this site over the long run PS will screw you out of it. 1,360,000 hands. That is how many hands we have tracked on PokerStars.com. We have been monitoring all-in situations at PokerStars.com for the past year and we have come to the conclusion that the games at this site are unfair and biased toward poor play. Read on to see our methodology. How we tracked it: By using 15 different computers running PokerStars software and each monitoring five tournament tables at once, we were able to isolate nearly 1.4 million hands where two or more players were all in against each other preflop. These hands were then grouped into three categories: 80/20 (i.e. pair vs. pair), 70/30 (i.e. AK vs. AQ), and 60/40 (i.e. JT vs. 45). We broke these matchups down and analyzed each. After reviewing all hands, we would expect the higher of two pocket pairs to hold up 81% of the time and tie about 0.5%. We would expect a high card hand matching neither of the opponent's cards to hold up roughly 59% of the time, with about 1.1% ending in a tie. Finally, we would expect dominating hands to win 71% of the time with 1.1% ending in a tie. The margin of error for win percentages is +- 1.7%. The results: In coinflip situations PokerStars worked out as expected, with a tiny advantage to the pocket pair of roughly 1.5%. In 60/40 situations PokerStars worked out roughly as expected, favoring the weaker hand only .8% more often than expected, well within our margin of error. In 80/20 situations we saw a little bit of deviation. The smaller pocket pair actually won 26.3% of the time, and the higher pair winning only 72.7% of the time. This is a well outside of our margin of error by nearly triple! In 70/30 situations things get even worse. The lesser of the two hands wins a whopping 41% of the time, a full 10% more than it should! With more than 475,000 hands to analyze, this is more than a simple statistical anomaly. This is downright fradulent. Other Findings: We became curious about what was going on so we looked closer at many of the 70/30 hands (a three-outer). We found that hands such as Kx vs. Kx were within the standard deviation, as was Qx vs. Qx. We did not have enough hands of Jx and lower in 3-outer situations to analyze. Upon looking closer at Ax hands we found that the weaker Ax beat the better Ax (i.e. A4 beating AK) about 4% more than it should. We also found than Ax vs a pocket pair beat the pocket pair more than 12% more often than it should! So clearly aces flop too often, right? Wrong. Simply looking at flops shows an even distribution of aces. However, when players are all in and need an ace, it tends to appear. When no ace is needed it does not appear, balancing out the discrepancy. Furthermore, we found that when two players held an ace, one or both of the remaining aces would appear on the board over 30% of the time. This is a huge discrepancy, nearly double the total of about 19% expected. We can only guess that this is to induce action, as this statistical anomaly does not occur with other cards. Conclusion: PokerStars is NOT a fair site! We do not recommend that you play there until they address these statistical anomalies. If they contact us about these things, we will confront them with the hand histories we recorded. Regardless of their response, our study is statistically significant enough to warrant extreme caution when dealing with PokerStars. A very good comment: Pokerstars can change the outcome of any game. They can factor a winning and lossing % to each name that signs on. If you have complained in the past you will very rarely win. If you do win a hand by chance, you will probably wind up splitting the pot. I have sat at 38 different 10/20 NL tables the other night and each table I sat down I alway got a 3 or 4 drop on my closed card. The odds are highly impossible to drop 27 3's and 24 duces and all other under cards were under 6. for a total of 38 hands. So last night I tried again with 100k starting and my losing % after 50 games was 96% FIXED, Rigged or whatever you want to call it. Please do not play with real monies you will definetly lose in the end. Programs can be tamper with.
  9. Re: Classic pokerstars so you lads have no problems telling people that they should stick a couple hundred dollars into this site that what happened here is a anomly the truth and you boys know it that what happened here is pretty stantard for pokerstars i have taken so many bad beats on ps that i have completly given up on the site ,have any of you played the 1/2 2/4 3/6 limit tables they are disgrace more one outters ruunner runner flushs fullhouses over fullhouses unless you played these tables and you know the reality of playing against a stack deck then you having a clue you may think it a laugh but when you see your hard earned being given some****in fish who hits his runner runner it not that humerous last hand on ps kk v jj flop 8 9 10 turn 7 river q PEOPLE DO NOT PUT ANY BIG MONEY INTO THIS SITE
  10. Re: Was I right to call with KK or should I have shoved ? nothing you could have done the chips were going in no matter what played perfect
  11. Re: WinHoldEm - dead ? Best alternative bot WHY NEED A BOT ? NO CONFIDENCE IN YOUR OWN GAME
  12. Re: Classic pokerstars THIS SITE WILL BLEED YOU DRY
  13. Re: BBOTD Saturday 8th September NICE ONE THANKS
  14. if you are thinking about investing money in pokerstars this might give you moment to reflect, please only play the freerolls or 1/2 c do not invest any big money into this site *********** # 1 ************** PokerStars Hand #85855619708: Tournament #604140113, Freeroll Hold'em No Limit - Level I (10/20) - 2012/09/08 2:04:50 WET [2012/09/07 21:04:50 ET] Table '604140113 37' 9-max Seat #2 is the button Seat 1: ewing901 (1470 in chips) Seat 2: pelego113 (4090 in chips) Seat 3: sQuare1989 (1460 in chips) Seat 4: BadCard1982 (5280 in chips) Seat 5: scruffy897 (1230 in chips) Seat 8: sveta687 (1490 in chips) is sitting out Seat 9: chillipops (1490 in chips) sQuare1989: posts small blind 10 BadCard1982: posts big blind 20 *** HOLE CARDS *** Dealt to scruffy897 [Kc Js] BadCard1982 said, "gracias pelego" scruffy897: calls 20 sveta687: folds chillipops: folds BadCard1982 said, "obrigado" ewing901: folds pelego113: calls 20 55555BMM has returned sQuare1989: folds BadCard1982: checks *** FLOP *** [9c Td Qh] pelego113 said, "valeu major" BadCard1982: checks pelego113 said, "chupa essa manga agora" scruffy897: bets 200 pelego113: raises 3870 to 4070 and is all-in BadCard1982: folds scruffy897: calls 1010 and is all-in Uncalled bet (2860) returned to pelego113 *** TURN *** [9c Td Qh] [Tc] *** RIVER *** [9c Td Qh Tc] [9h] *** SHOW DOWN *** scruffy897: shows [Kc Js] (a straight, Nine to King) pelego113: shows [Ts 3d] (a full house, Tens full of Nines) BadCard1982 said, "jajajajaja" pelego113 collected 2490 from pot scruffy897 finished the tournament in 1175th place *** SUMMARY *** Total pot 2490 | Rake 0 Board [9c Td Qh Tc 9h] Seat 1: ewing901 folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 2: pelego113 (button) showed [Ts 3d] and won (2490) with a full house, Tens full of Nines Seat 3: sQuare1989 (small blind) folded before Flop Seat 4: BadCard1982 (big blind) folded on the Flop Seat 5: scruffy897 showed [Kc Js] and lost with a straight, Nine to King Seat 8: sveta687 folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 9: chillipops folded before Flop (didn't bet) If you have any questions, please contact us at "PokerStars Support" -----WHERE DO I start @pokerstars.com> [TABLE=width: 1] [TR] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
  15. Re: something strange at boyle poker room JUST FINISH PLAYING ON BOYLE SITE AGAIN LOST IT ALL AGAIN KK V 33 FLOP K33 BRICK BRICK JESUS WILL I EVER GET SENSE AND STAY AWAY FROM FLEA RIDDEN ****HOLE OF A SITE I MIGHT TAKE UP KNITTING OR GOING FOR LONG COUNTRY WALKS THESE *******S DESERVE TO BURN IN HELL FOR WHAT THEY DOING TO GAME OF POKER
  16. Re: something strange at boyle poker room never said anything about running a scam just the fact they choose places where the regulators have less bite than the mainland government the only question i ask is why
  17. Re: something strange at boyle poker room
  18. Re: something strange at boyle poker room it would be impossible to prove that it was deliberate or that i was set up in some way as for the fault of software that it favours one player over another i cant really see the point in that for surly the rake would be the same no matter who won but yet these miracle outs still keep coming it would be herculean task to prove a site was up to something dodgy you would have gather millions upon millions of hand histories and do statiscal anayalis compare odds of each winning hand against the true odds and the compile these results into overveiw and the they differ from the expected variance yet this could be sites incentive to something dodgy for how could you prove they are cheating impossible as footnote why are they based in channel islands free from government regulations and standards they claim they fall under the jurdistion of channel island gambling commission which as much bite as fly with a toothache
  19. Re: something strange at boyle poker room i didn't time it was only a guesstimate but there was noticeable time lag between the turn been dealt and the river why? why not deal the river at the same speed as the turn or why the time lag on that hand and no other look at the odds at the hitting that seven seriously man you cant be that naive you siting there with a couple hundred dollars in the pot waiting for the river knowing your gonna get ****** is not nice feeling how many times online have you been beaten by the miracle river that one outta that makes your jaw drop with amazement as i said their something sick with online poker
  20. playing heads up 2/4 no limit for about 15 minutes when i am dealt 99 i rise 4x the villian sits there letting the clock run down with about 3 sec left goes all in i instant call turns over 77 flop blank turn blank here is were gets serious dodgy the river card never appears for about five seconds i knew i was ****** just gotta felling it was searching for the other seven and wouldnt you belive it up pops the seven of diamonds now i don't mine taking a beat its part and parcel of the game but when you know before the card is laid on the table that you are beat there is something serious sick with online poker i dont know what they have to gain but this **** is just wrong and cannot be justfied by the variance arguement
  21. Re: 10NL Zoom - All in pre-flop i dunno how people can justify this he pushes with 6.8 with six players behind he is either dumb or a complete donkey he gets called by a good player with AA and hits his miracle cards if this was a once off i would say fair enough that's variance but their is a rationale behind why he won that hand the simple fact is that stars award donks and punish good players the first thing when sit a table on stars is check out who is most losing player on the table and try to avoid into getting into large pots with them though with AA its near impossible against these specific type of player i would be happy to check call to river even though most logical thing would be try to punish them for their draw but they will call you down and they constantly make their str8 or flush you might have flopped a set or two pair and the temptation is shove it all in ( i done it umpteen times) only to get called by 3,4 of diamonds or the favorite one on stars 5,6 of clubs and they nearly always hit if you are gonna push wait for the turn give them something to think about but they are such donks they are more than likely to call and you will more than suprise how often that miracle cards my advise fold against these muppets for you not only playing against the player but also the software who will give a losing player the incentive to keep playing and dumping more money into thr site
  22. this is what happens when you withdraw funds from your poker stars a/c so be warned.i finished sixth in fpp tourney for $20 and i manage to turn it into $650 playing 1/2 2/4 3/6 limit over space of three weeks i took out 500, these are the hands that i made me wonder about the fairness of pokerstars so leave your money in if you want to avoid these things from happening scruffy987(me)-------------------------- jampots qd jc-------------------------------- 5h 4s (3/6 limit) --------------flop qh js 2d turn 6s river 3h 1os 7d(sb)--------------------------- As ks(bb) ---------------flop 10d 10h 7c turn Ad river Ac qd qs ---------------------------------Ad 7d ---------------flop 2c 5d 8h turn 7s river 7h (that one was costly) Ah jd -----------------------------------2s 9s(who knows why) ------------------flop ks Ad 3c turn js river 3s at this stage my 150 was down to 35 so i just dug my heels in and carried on this hand i nearly flung the laptop across the room Ac As------------------------------------- 8d 7d --------------------flop qh Ad 4d turn 7c river 3d please do not talk about variance for i am not that naive to belive all the major hands i played in that session where i had the best of it on the flop could be consistly out drawn it never happened pre withdrawal of the funds l
  23. Re: Jumps Thread - 28th September foolish to back aganist Gordon Elliotts horse today
  24. playing nl 1/2 holdem on pokerstars all hand folded to sb who just calls i check with Q5 off suit SB has $178 polo321 $134 flop 6 8 Q(cant remember suits) I bet $20 sb raises 40 my five kicker looks very suspect but this player has been aggresive i think he is trying to bully out of the pot i call the $20 turn Q now i think im definitly ahead bet $50 sb calls the $50 very suspious when he calls, that my five kicker is looking very weak river 10 i check sb goes all in am in a tight spot bid he slow play a full house , q with a decent kicker hit a straight on the last card in the balance of probalibty i reckoned i was losing i folded sb shows 79d straight to the ten what i would like to know should i pushed after the turn took my chances or even after the flop it would have been very hard to call on just on a draw i think i focus too much on my kicker then putting him on a drawing hand i think could i have played this hand better its kind of wedge in my brain for the last week
  25. Re: boyles cash tables got my bankroll back to 5%loss for the year after the above disaster by playing LIVE tourmants in poker lessons have to be learned the hard way no more online poker for me:ok:ok