Is UB jinxed...... or is it just me?
I've only ever played on UB. These are 2 of the most frustrating scenarios that keep happening time after time. Is it just on UB, or have you online players find it happens on all sites.
1. The crap I fold (2,7; 10,3; etc) would have been the winning hand ...... boats or flushes. This happens to me ALOT........ way too often to write off to coincidence.
2. The most annoying hands suck out on the river in the most amazing ways ...... usually when I hit trips ....... again, way too often to write off to coincidence.
It's not just me, right?
1. The crap I fold (2,7; 10,3; etc) would have been the winning hand ...... boats or flushes. This happens to me ALOT........ way too often to write off to coincidence.
2. The most annoying hands suck out on the river in the most amazing ways ...... usually when I hit trips ....... again, way too often to write off to coincidence.
It's not just me, right?
Comments
I can't possibly dispute the overwhelming literature of statistical evidence that attests to this.
However, I believe the original quesion was whether or not UB was jinxed, not rigged. This, I believe, has been a relatively unexplored question to this point.
ScottyZ
I have none. Sorry, I was just kidding re: the whole 'rigged' thing, but my sense of humour (if you could call it that) doesn't translate very well sometimes.
To answer your question more seriously, there have been nights when I've cursed these rigged &*^(%^&! sites up and down. But, I've been playing online for quite some time now, and if I look at my overall results, I have absolutely no reason to complain. This, combined with the fact that I appear to be on some sort of a 'roll' lately, has me in a particularly positive mindset when it comes to online poker.
But trust me, I have felt your pain, and I'm sure I'll be feeling it again soon enough. All I can say is that you need to keep a close eye on your long-term results. In one night, or one week, or one month, you may feel like you're never going to drag a pot again, after people put bad beat after bad beat on you. It will turn, and if it doesn't, you have to consider the possibility that it's not bad luck.Â
Once you rule out bad luck, that leaves you with two options: it's bad play, or the sites are rigged. The 'rigged' option is MUCH easier to swallow, which is why you see so many 'online poker is rigged ' posts. (Not many here, fortunately).
I can't possibly dispute the overwhelming literature of statistical evidence that attests to this.
ScottyZ
but yes there are periods which i call the UB %$#$ where u just cant win. i adjust accordingly.
I'm not going into a big whinefest but things are seriously ridiculous that make me wonder.
See y'all at Brantford or Niagara and of course the local games.
What exactly are you implying/saying here?
This is exactly my reasoning for not playing online at these 2 particular sites. I find myself thinking I should fold (or call) when I know I shouldn't just because I figure a miracle card will hit either way. It is really frustrating and as you mention it takes me out of my game. I realize that miracle rivers (or runner-runner flush, str8) happen live as well, I also know that I see more hands online which means it will happen more online but.......
I might put a little into pokerstars and see how that plays out. I haven't played for cash on pokerstars yet so my bias should be limited.
BIAS ALERT: Stars fanboi here. I'm not so sure about this PUNKYMISHA. I recognize part of my response is ego driven as I've been very happy playing 1/2 NL there the last year. Here's the other part...I'll use 10/20 NL as the example because there are fewer tables to track. I often check who's playing these tables and see the same names over and over with nice profits. The max buyin is 2k and it no longer surprises me to see stacks in the 8k to 14k range. Players I can list off the top are:  twin-caracas, pbocop, H@&&INGGOL, thorladen and not only don't forget MitchD, just go sit somewhere else when he's in.
I suppose this is a problem I cannot contest, for example, having only taken a couple of accounting courses in high school. Still, the layman has heard of Enron and others. So even if they are regulated we can never really know? I suppose there will always be accusations and dare I say it *flame on* mild conspiracy theories.
Are you saying PokerStars is making these players call bets? Why would someone not have a right to be in the pot? This is our bread and butter, these bad players that will call us down. I'm sure over time you'd see they rarely hit, the bad beats just stay in our heads longer. I catch myself saying this from time to time after a bad beat as well 'man, he had no business being in that pot!'...but I play my game and usually end up getting my money back inthe long run. I mostly play online poker, but when I do get together with my buds to play live we see these hands as well, it happens, it's poker, and someone usually says 'man, I thought that sh#t only happened online'.
Someone great, and I'm not sure who it was, but dammit they were great, once said...............shit happens!
If it were rigged for rake, there'd be a lot of good hands preflop to bump the pot up, then the flop would kill all hands but one so the hand is completed quickly. This is because the best way to generate rake over time is to churn out many hands per hour with decent pots, not take every hand to the river with tons of betting to slow things down. Lots of poker players like to believe there's some kind of grand conspiracy behind their last couple of bad beats, but absent some nice crunchy statistics backing up such a contention it seems to me that selection bias is the most likely explanation.
No offense, but if that's your thinking you might have bigger problems than crazy suckouts. Â Maybe the masses are thinking these same things and hence there are more ridiculous calls online hence leading to more ridiculous beats. Â I think some people overestimate their odds of winning as well. Â Eg. if you ask the average player what the odds would be of AA winning 3 consecutive hands vs. say TT preflop allin. Â I would imagine most would say something like 2/3 to 3/4 of the time. Â In reality the odds of winning all 3 is rougly 50/50. Â Even HUGE poker edges in the grand scheme of things are NOT giant edges (compared to the odds against winning the lottery for example). Â Order and orders of magnitude in difference... Â I think what most people have problems with is not the ridiculous outdraws, but the ridiculous CALLS made by these players (which in the long run should be welcomed). Â Just my 2 cents...
No, it's not. Rake is capped at a pot size that varies by limit played, but generally is around 10-20 BBs (less at higher limits) - see the PokerStars rake page for details:
http://www.pokerstars.com/rake.html
Since you're an accountant with thousands of hours of online poker experience, I'm sure you'll realize that Poker Stars gains nothing from big pots - they would much rather you play two hands with 20 BB pots than one with 40.
Then you'll have no trouble providing actual stats to back up what you're saying. As I'm sure you're aware, selection bias is completely independent of the number of trials, it's based on having a vested interest in particular outcomes; the only way to combat such bias is rigorous record keeping. If your records actually show non-random results, then please put the data on a website somewhere - you'll be the first to do so, which will be a huge service to the online poker community.
The setup of this statistical experiment worries me a great deal.
Other than the distribution of the cards you are dealt yourself pre-flop (that is, studying the shuffle algorithm), statistical analysis of card distributions in Texas Holdem is pretty much impossible.
The crux of the matter is that poker players make decisions which affect which hands will go to a showdown, which hole cards will be present at a showdown, which hands will see a flop dealt, which hands will see a turn card dealt, which hands will see a river card dealt, etc, etc.
Without being able to model your opponents' decision making algortihms (good luck!), you can't design any meaningful statistical analysis of post-flop events in Texas Holdem.
ScottyZ