Pacific Poker Puzzle Piece

[FlFishOn]

I started a poll about PacP appearance VS results two weeks ago. The results, as i interpreted them, suggest that while PacP was a really juicy looking site, many folks were not earning huge pots of money. THis also mirrored my experience and I decided to quit playing there.

I had one account there that was two+ months dormant. While the poll was going on I funded it and played 281 hands of limit hold'em. Before playing I decided to log all starting hands JJ or better and here are the results: 3-AA 1-KK 3-QQ 1-JJ. One would expect 5 of these starters on average and I got 8. I didn't do the math but my guess is that's 1.5 +/- SDs out. Someone should repeat my experiment. Twenty repetitions would be better.

Me, I don't really care too much how it turns out, I'm still done with PacP.... but I would love to see any site caught cold.

[tomdemaine]

[censored] man 250+ hands?!

Call the papers!

[TheIrishThug]

1) as u said, 279 hands is barely enough data to judge them on
2) y do u want to see a site get cuaght adjusting the distribution of hands. there is no way that this would be seen as a good thing for the credibility of online poker as a whole.
if the public learns that one site was actually rigged, then everything might get shut down or at least a lot more ppl would be talking about it.

[BruceZ]

[ QUOTE ]
I started a poll about PacP appearance VS results two weeks ago. The results, as i interpreted them, suggest that while PacP was a really juicy looking site, many folks were not earning huge pots of money. THis also mirrored my experience and I decided to quit playing there.

I had one account there that was two+ months dormant. While the poll was going on I funded it and played 281 hands of limit hold'em. Before playing I decided to log all starting hands JJ or better and here are the results: 3-AA 1-KK 3-QQ 1-JJ. One would expect 5 of these starters on average and I got 8. I didn't do the math but my guess is that's 1.5 +/- SDs out. Someone should repeat my experiment. Twenty repetitions would be better.

Me, I don't really care too much how it turns out, I'm still done with PacP.... but I would love to see any site caught cold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not as bad as you think:

P(8 or more) = 1 - P(7 or less) = 1 - BINOMDIST(7,281,4/221,TRUE) =~ 14.1%.

If you use the normal approximation to the binomial with a mean of 5.08, and a standard deviation of sqrt(5), then you should correct for continuity by computing P(X >= 7.5) instead of P(X >= 8), and this gives +1.08 standard deviations or 14.0%, in good agreement with above. The Poisson approximation is almost right on too, especially if you interpolate the table to lamda = 5.08.

[FlFishOn]

"...credibility of online poker as a whole."

This is already the #1 barrier to entry for new players. That won't change.

The first site busted will open the eyes of all to the possibility and get us cleaner poker overall longer term.