The problem with online poker

[Nixon]

The only problem with online poker I see is the random number generator. They appear to have one per site, which makes for some interesting hands. What should be happening is one per table, to make things totally fair. Yes, you are going to see a lot of high hands playing one generator per site, considering the number of hands dealt, but it does not represent the actual game.

[daryn]

of course it represents the actual game. the long term statistics are exactly the same (for all intents and purposes) as they would be if you actually sat down with a deck and dealt 3 million hands out or whatever..

i recently got into a fight with this nerd about random number generators on poker sites. the thing i couldn't stand was he was so hung up on saying how it's not "truly random" and no RNG can be "truly random" by definition.

now, i believe this is true, but the question is, does it matter? the answer is no! it's random enough to the point where you're not going to notice! it might change the odds of flopping a set by .001%.. so who cares! it's not going to change the game of poker.

[astroglide]

rngs can be made completely unpredictable. i've seen some that use cameras viewing lava lamps, take pictures, and apply entropy gathered from a pc to seed a number. there is no way that somebody could predict that.

[fluff]

Is this a good time to bring up Pattern Mapping? Cause I'll bring up Pattern Mapping if necessary!

[daryn]

i had to read that about 3 or 4 times to get what you meant. i was like, what is he talking about.. lava lamps??

[Jeremy'sSpoken]

I said no message

[Thythe]

It is correct that no random number generator is completely random. I believe that it is incorrect to say that it changes the odds in any way (not even a minute amount). The only "problem" would be that perhaps someone could predict the sequence...the answer is no. It is impossible to predict the sequence.

[daryn]

right.. my little bit about changing the odds by .0001% or whatever was just to make a point that even if it was not random by that much, it still wouldn't matter.

[Terry]

Don't change it now. I've learned how to wiggle my mouse just the right way to give me my magic river card.

[Acesover8s]

[uuDevil]

My guess is an RNG is better at producing a "random" sequence of cards than an actual poker dealer. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MicroBob]

i like milk.

and it can be argued that a live B&M deal isn't COMPLETELY random either...although some dealers are more random than others.


also, feel free to bring up pattern mapping. it'a always a good time to bring up pattern mapping.

[Al Mirpuri]

I read somewhere that a human would need to shuffle the cards twelve times after a round of cards in order to ensure a random deal. When humans deal the cards obviously 'warm up', that is, produce more hands of the type being sought through inadequate shuffling. This is easy to see when you swap playing one game and then play another game. For example, say a home game decided to deal two hours of Hold'em and then two hours of Seven Card Stud. Near the end of the second hour of Seven Card Stud a lot more three straights and three flushes would be being dealt.

[bigpooch]

I definitely agree with you here! Even if a RNG doesn't
generate a random shuffle, what does? Since so many poker
players are willing to have a dealer or shuffle the cards
themselves, why wouldn't they let a RNG determine the cards
for them? Also, in a live game, there is the danger of a
mechanic manipulating the cards: it doesn't have to happen
often, but just a few times a night to cause one player to
win significantly more than the others.

[Lori]

The only problem with online poker I see is the random number generator

I agree.
Without the random number generator, the game would be so much easier.

Lori