Party Poker - Finished

[glceud]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

GaF is right that it can take an age to get on the table you want on Party (or Prima for that matter). Before I sit down to 4 table Party I will datamine 12 tables for an hour and then get on the waiting list for the juiciest 5/6 tables. It can take a while to get 4 of the 6 tables going, but then again many other whores have probably also identified fish or maniacs at the tables. On winning at Party, I play at Party whenever they offer me a bonus and have been beating the 0.5/1 & 1/2 limit games consistently for the past 18 months. The former for approx. 2BB/100 and the latter for about 1 BB/100.. Not great but I am beating the game and the bonus clears quickly 4 tabling. The difficulty with Party is that whilst you want to play against these FISH and Maniacs you are going to suffer greater variance (both +ve and -ve) than you would playing at a table where bets and raises actually tell you a lot about the hand your opponent is holding (especially with Maniacs the info. you get from a raise is very difficult to interpret). The variance on Crypto 1/2 for example is much less for me than on Party. 150BB downswings are not uncommon for me on Party and I am a winning player. I've learnt to deal with them, if I didn't I might as well stop playing now. I know in the long-run though that I will congregate towards 1BB/100 (I'd love to improve this). I still think this thread is a piss-take and I'm wasting my time writing this but then again some people still think Shergar is alive, MI5 killed Diana and that Elvis lives. For me, the latter 3 examples are equally as likely as Party Poker (ex FTSE 100 company, audited by Big 4 Accountants, blah, blah, blah) being rigged. FBF

Far more professional than i ever will be. The point regarding the table wait is: if you click on a table and ask for the first available table with 9 players you will never have to wait. If you ask for specific table of course you will. You are playing the game roughly the same way i do for bonuses at sites. I make marginal profits at all sites before the bonus is added 9 times out of 10 and have been doing so for 5 years. The Party Bonus is on paper one of the easiest online yet I have never managed to play the raked hands and make a profit. Once the bonus is added on I do show a profit but its a bit of a waste of time. Minimum wage and all that. Can you compare your rate of return at party with other sites? At party you make a marginal profit I make a marginal loss. That only proves that you are a better player than me. At other sites I make a marginal profit. If your profit on other sites is higher than at party does that not suggest something. I'm not complaing about any bad beat, I never do, I'm just pointing out that i dont win at a site some one else is having doubts about. Losing the free $$'s they give from time is probably a self fullfilling prophecy.

[glceud]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

There are 4 empty tables that all these players on the waiting list can join!!!!

99% of people playing 0.50/1.00 fixed limit are doing so to achieve raked hands stating tables defeats the purpose

[sensibleboy]

Re: Party Poker - Finished Well, I have started playing on Mansion and must say its far better. The bad beats are nowhere near as bad as PP. Doesnt seem a coincidence afterall, the river card on PP seems to be causing alot of bother. Time and time again...

[PAULM03]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

Well, I have started playing on Mansion and must say its far better. The bad beats are nowhere near as bad as PP. Doesnt seem a coincidence afterall, the river card on PP seems to be causing alot of bother. Time and time again...

Sorry mate but you're talking bollocks. I've tried to be polite and hold off saying it but your last post is just ludicrous.

[guesswest]

Re: Party Poker - Finished Does anyone know of any studies on this? Debunking ideas like action hands and house bots sucking out and whatnot? I know sites are independently audited, but they're just audited for basic card distribution which wouldn't answer this. I asked on the maths forum on 2+2 (link below) and to my surprise nobody has posted mentioning any, yet anyway. It seems amazing if nobody is crunching numbers on this, considering the amount of money in online poker. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=7725414&an=0&page=0#Post7725414

[PAULM03]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

I asked on the maths forum on 2+2 (link below) and to my surprise nobody has posted mentioning any, yet anyway. It seems amazing if nobody is crunching numbers on this, considering the amount of money in online poker.

I'm not sure it's such a simple problem. Didn't someone post on here a few weeks back asking how likely you were to hold the nuts after the turn only to lose on the river and no-one really answered as far as I'm aware. Maybe one way would be to classify some action flops - 2 or more players flopping 2 pair 2 or more players flopping trips 2 or more players flopping better than trips Calculate the frequencies of these occurences and compare it with how frequently they actually happen. Of course then you should really include drawing hands too which would make it more complicated:unsure OK. How would you go about proving a poker room is rigged? (anecdotal evidence of pocket As all-in pre flop being beaten by 7 2o twice in a day does not, I repeat DOES NOT count) Maybe the only real way would be to have access to the source code, which, unsurprisingly, the poker rooms wouldn't let you do.

[guesswest]

Re: Party Poker - Finished I thought about that - and I agree it's probably much more complex than it appears at first glance. But poker deals with a finite number of outcomes, so it has to be at least theoretically possible to get some useful results. I think? I'm really surprised just a couple people have responded on 2+2 - there's some crazily in-depth maths problems pop up on there. I'm probably missing something, but I'm not sure what.

[slapdash]

Re: Party Poker - Finished There's really no way to test the vague statement "it's not random". If you collect a pile of data, there are millions of different "patterns" you could look for (too many paired flops, too many straights beaten by flushes, too many quads, etc., etc., etc.). Out of these millions of things, it's pretty likely that there will be some that happen with a frequency that is less than a one in a million chance. In fact, if there wasn't something "unusual" about the data, that would in itself be unusual. All you can really do is get the people who complain about the "non-randomness" to pin down a precise way in which they believe the cards are not random, and test for that. Although I don't believe that online poker is rigged, the auditing of the RNGs doesn't really increase my confidence very much. I have no idea what they test for, and as far as I know, they just give a rather general statement that the RNG looks OK to them. It would be interesting to have somebody specifically test for "faults" that had been claimed by the "XXXX Poker is rigged" brigade.

[PAULM03]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

All you can really do is get the people who complain about the "non-randomness" to pin down a precise way in which they believe the cards are not random, and test for that.

So say someone said 'I believe I'm being rivered too often on party-poker'. How would you test for that? I suppose you need to start off by working out how often you could reasonably expect to be rivered - how would you do that? I honestly have no idea.

[guesswest]

Re: Party Poker - Finished I'm not sure either - but the immediate problem is that it'd be dependent on what your opponents do. Most 'ouch' rivers occur in situations where your opponent should have folded. So you'd expect to see increases on loose sites like Party vs tight ones like FT. That's one big and very fuzzy variable to factor. I think it'd be relatively straightforward to figure out the chances of getting rivered if not for this - tho miles beyond mental arithmetic, it'd essentially be basic probability.

[Penelopeys]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

Well, I have started playing on Mansion and must say its far better. The bad beats are nowhere near as bad as PP. Doesnt seem a coincidence afterall, the river card on PP seems to be causing alot of bother. Time and time again...

Jeeeez... you MUST be joking... there's is NO way you can honestly think that online poker is fixed???? :unsure :unsure Have you ever played a live game?

[GaF]

Re: Party Poker - Finished Isn't it easy enough to see if outdraws are happening against you more than they should? Whenever the money all goes in, you know EXACTLY what proportion of the time you should beat your opponent (and what proportion lose) - if you are an 80% fav to win $1000, your expectation is $800 - add up your total EV's and compare it to your total wins ...... if you are playing against bots who "know" when they will outdraw you, it'll be straightforward enough to see.....

[slapdash]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

So say someone said 'I believe I'm being rivered too often on party-poker'. How would you test for that? I suppose you need to start off by working out how often you could reasonably expect to be rivered - how would you do that? I honestly have no idea.

You don't necessarily have to calculate the general probability of "being rivered". This would likely depend on your style of play, and which hands you play, anyway. But you could look at all hands where it goes to the river and you're ahead, and for each one, calculate the chance of being rivered for that particular hand, and that would give you a figure for how often for this particular sample of hands, you "should" have been rivered. This requires that you know your opponent's hand, of course, which you will if he does river you, but might not if he doesn't, especially if you bet on the river and he folds. (I think this is one reason people think they're cursed by the river card, by the way: if they are rivered, then they always get to see what rubbish their opponent has bet on, but if they're not, then a lot of the time they never get to know what their opponent had.)

[lou saban]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

Jeeeez... you MUST be joking... there's is NO way you can honestly think that online poker is fixed???? :unsure :unsure Have you ever played a live game?

agree with ya there pene, i used to be a bit dubious about online poker until i started playing live. you get the same bad beats , people hitting their one and only out on the river to get the nuts etc. i think you just see it and notice it more online due to the amount of hands played. i wouldnt like to guess the % but there would be considerably more hands played in 10 mins online compared to 10 mins live. this might have nothing at all to do with it but it is food for thought

[slapdash]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

Does anyone know of any studies on this? Debunking ideas like action hands and house bots sucking out and whatnot? I know sites are independently audited' date=' but they're just audited for basic card distribution which wouldn't answer this.[/quote'] I remember seeing some stats collected by somebody on Paradise (I think) over a large number of hands, including about some of the ways people claim online poker is fixed (too many paired or suited flops, etc.) but I don't remember the details. Needless to say, there were no significant discrepancies. I'll see if I can find it again.

[guesswest]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

Isn't it easy enough to see if outdraws are happening against you more than they should? Whenever the money all goes in, you know EXACTLY what proportion of the time you should beat your opponent (and what proportion lose) - if you are an 80% fav to win $1000, your expectation is $800 - add up your total EV's and compare it to your total wins ...... if you are playing against bots who "know" when they will outdraw you, it'll be straightforward enough to see.....

Yes, I'm pretty sure that's correct, or in other words, I was talking bollocks :D That said, involving money and EV is unnecessarily complicated I think? I'd just look at the percentages for the outdraw and whether the actual results approximate the probable ones.

[slapdash]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

I remember seeing some stats collected by somebody on Paradise (I think) over a large number of hands, including about some of the ways people claim online poker is fixed (too many paired or suited flops, etc.) but I don't remember the details. Needless to say, there were no significant discrepancies. I'll see if I can find it again.

Here: http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_thread/thread/caa79fd079bee55d/365d9587e5fc3144?lnk=st&q=&rnum=3&hl=en#365d9587e5fc3144

[PAULM03]

Re: Party Poker - Finished

Isn't it easy enough to see if outdraws are happening against you more than they should? Whenever the money all goes in, you know EXACTLY what proportion of the time you should beat your opponent (and what proportion lose) - if you are an 80% fav to win $1000, your expectation is $800 - add up your total EV's and compare it to your total wins ...... if you are playing against bots who "know" when they will outdraw you, it'll be straightforward enough to see.....

:$ I really should be sharper with stuff like this. I think my missis is right, every time I learn something complicated a little bit of simple stuff gets pushed out.

[mrmuzeman]

Re: Party Poker - Finished A big factor with playing is all those times that people fold and you never get to see what they had. People fold after calling on turns and rivers all the time right? Well all those times they probably had stupid gutshots, bottom pairs hoping to hit trips etc etc etc. The key here is you only get to SEE THEM when they hit their lucky card. All those dozens of times where people fold is where they didnt get lucky but you dont really pay attention as its just a fold. So it seems like they happen a lot but its going on every hand near enough, you just dont get to see the cards.

[Valiant23]

Re: Party Poker - Finished Mrm makes an extremely valid point. How often do you get a jibber-jabber (copyright Cloud) at the table who sees a flop of 9, 2, 2 and types in the chat box, after the hand has finished if your lucky, "lol I folded 92os". :eyes

There's really no way to test the vague statement "it's not random". If you collect a pile of data, there are millions of different "patterns" you could look for (too many paired flops, too many straights beaten by flushes, too many quads, etc., etc., etc.). Out of these millions of things, it's pretty likely that there will be some that happen with a frequency that is less than a one in a million chance. In fact, if there wasn't something "unusual" about the data, that would in itself be unusual. All you can really do is get the people who complain about the "non-randomness" to pin down a precise way in which they believe the cards are not random, and test for that. Although I don't believe that online poker is rigged, the auditing of the RNGs doesn't really increase my confidence very much. I have no idea what they test for, and as far as I know, they just give a rather general statement that the RNG looks OK to them. It would be interesting to have somebody specifically test for "faults" that had been claimed by the "XXXX Poker is rigged" brigade.

Unfortunately I feel quite closely that this is true of certain poker software operators. I say unfortunately because I while I'm happy to tell a story of my demise in a tournament, I don't particularly care much for bad beats anymore. It happens. I do believe that poker sites should have a vested interest in developing good RnG's, but I think that because of the sheer scale of the number of hands involved that abnormal variance can occur. So player x may play for 2 hours and see more than his statistical share of certain hands in that time span.

Well, I have started playing on Mansion and must say its far better. The bad beats are nowhere near as bad as PP. Doesnt seem a coincidence afterall, the river card on PP seems to be causing alot of bother. Time and time again...

Its hard not to laugh at this post. I've had a lot of success on Mansion for the relatively short time I've played there, but I can provide proof of two of the more remarkable hands I've played on there. http://www.punterslounge.com/forum/showpost.php?p=495610&postcount=1 I have seen as many bad beats on there as I have anywhere else.

Jeeeez... you MUST be joking... there's is NO way you can honestly think that online poker is fixed???? :unsure :unsure Have you ever played a live game?

Actually, in live poker at the start of a tourney I try to have a look at flops with suited connectors. My theory being the dealers inefficiency in shuffling. Now then, how many live poker tournies have I won.... :unsure Anyway, despite the fact I don't like bad beats I still think they happen. I will at least entertain bad beat stories in emotional terms. Such as getting the money in ahead with AA on the bubble of a 'major' tourney and losing etc... Party Poker must be fixed anyway........ I made a profit there. :tongue2

[Jaded]

Re: Party Poker - Finished Look, they're all blatantly fixed against me! 3 times last night in 2 hours playing I folded hands pre-flop that would've made 2 pair/full house/straight on the flop. The reason this shows it's biased? They're the only 3 hands I bloody well folded!!