Party / Empire hand history issue is still alive

[Terry]

Don’t know if this is worth bothering with or not, what with the negative posts the past few weeks regarding Party/Empire, but it looks like the hand history issue (they stopped showing hole cards of calling hands) is still alive.

I got an email from them today saying that they are forwarding my emails to their management. Quite puzzling... Does that mean that management was unaware of the issue? That management didn’t know they changed things? Hmmm. What’s going on over there??? Boss been on vacation? I expected more from Mike Sexton.

Anyway, it looks like there is still a chance that they’ll put the hole cards back in. I suggested that they can keep their new format and just add (back) the hole cards. That should keep us and them happy. Their argument is that the new format clarifies the play of the hand... Seems to me that showing the cards the other player had is BEST way to clarify the play... as well as letting us protect our own butts against colluders.

So if you play there, or did until the recent change, let them know that you want those hole cards back.

[PokerScene]

We got an email explaining that the company that is doing the RNG audit requires ome format changes...but that doesn't explain the showing cards out of order, or not showing hole cards..especially in stud!

Hole cards are what hand histories are all about...collusion is much easier to detect when you have lots of hand histories with hole cards shown when called!

[pokerhacker]

I dont think you should be able to see anyones hold
cards unless it goes to show down hand history or not.

In real life if you dont get called you dont have to show.

So internet shouldnt be any different!

[Inthacup]

I expected more from Mike Sexton.

Mike Sexton is the host, not the CEO. Vikrant should be held accountable before Mike. I expect more from the PartyPoker team. They are the 2nd biggest poker site on the net. If they had above average customer service and reliable servers, I think they'd be giving Paradise a run for their money by now. Their inability to handle the hand history situation is just another sign that they aren't ready to become the biggest site online.

[PokerScene]

yes pokerhacker...but the showdown cards should be available when you take trouble to look at hand histories...seems that it is about as often as all hole cards would REALLY be exposed at a live table...and again, in STUD, the ORDER that the betting cards come is VERY important...just UNDERLINE or BOLD the cards that PLAY!

[PokerScene]

Has anyone noticed that, to my knowledge, Party Poker/Empire Poker are the only sites with HEADS UP FLOP GAMES where the big blind is the BUTTON!

This really makes for a BORING Game in my opinion, as the small blind almost never wants to put in chips to play out of position, and the button ends up putting in six chips to chase ONE in a three six game!

[Terry]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
In real life if you dont get called you dont have to show.

[/ QUOTE ]

In real life you can ask to see the cards in the calling hand. Getting a hand history is the same. Both are subject to abuse, but are necessary to protect the integrity of the game.

In real life you can watch the cards being shuffled and dealt.

In real life you can see and hear if the other players are talking about their hands.

In real life the people working in a poker room know something about poker.

In real life if you think something may be wrong with the game you can pick up your chips and leave -- you don't have to trust (that's what this is really all about, trust) that an unknown person at an unknown address in another country will send you your money.

These are just a few of the differences between real life poker and internet poker. There are many more.

[Terry]

Inthacup, yes, I like your wording better. " I expect more from the PartyPoker team."

I signed up with Party because so many here seemed happy with them. Since the PokerSpot fiasco, I've always waited for reports before joining a new site.

The games were very good, and I was settling in to play some long hours.

After I'd played for 35 or 40 hours they stopped showing the hole cards in hand histories "in order to clarify the play of the hand." Huh? That just doesn't make sense. How the **** can we understand the play of the hand without knowing what the hand was?

If they want to add information to "clarify", fine, add away... but don't take away the one thing that tells us whether or not there was something funny about the way the hand went down.

[zooey]

I want the to see the hole cards too. A cut n paste from a previous post:

--------
I do really hate their new hand histories, and have been over on UB and True more because of it. Don't get me wrong, I think it makes sense for a card room to make the statistical mining of hand histories more difficult, and I think its been established that only the most stupid of colluders are going to be (unfortunately?) caught by their shown-down hands. But as a data-miner, I'm naturally going to go where the data is.
--------

But I DON'T feel entitled to them. I think its been argued pretty conclusively that looking at the hole cards of shown hands will only catch the most stupid of cheaters, and these are the kind of guys you want in there flailing away with their new sure fire system anyway. Colluders advantages come much more from "to play or not to play" than fancy sandwich maneuvers. If someone wants to argue differently, I'd love to hear it, but its going to be a tough sell. Do a search on IWTSTH on the various forums here and you'll read some good work that went into figuring this out.

I want the hole cards because I'm willing to put sweat equity into looking at them and using them to profiling my opponents. I'm going to be more inclined to play on places that show them. But I think to argue that I have a RIGHT to them to protect myself from collusion is a disingenous argument.

comments?

Best,

zooey

[Terry]

&gt;&gt; I think it makes sense for a card room to make the statistical mining of hand histories more difficult

I’ll give you a “perhaps” on this point. While using hand histories to evaluate an opponent’s play gives the data miner a certain edge, well, paying attention also gives a good player an edge. I tend to think that I can reach some pretty accurate conclusions about an unknown person’s play before an analysis program would be providing usable information, giving me a shot at a newbies $ while he still has some. I dunno, I’m, umm, undecided about this. The one thing that really concerns me is the swapping of thousands of hands, giving someone I have never played before a read on my play.

The (very) good thing about data miners is the information they glean regarding the fairness of the deal. That’s a big part of my concern. Take a look at this link provided by lorinda in another thread: Thwang99's True Poker hands . I’ve done research like this myself on the sites at which I choose to play, so starting on a new site requires a considerable investment of time for me. If others can do it and post the results, that’s a good thing, keeping down the “crooked deal” rants and making it much easier to try different sites.

&gt;&gt; and I think its been established that only the most stupid of colluders are going to be (unfortunately?) caught by their shown-down hands.

So what’s wrong with catching the stupid ones? I’ve reported a few pairs of them who were never seen again. I’ve been caught between them before realizing they weren’t just maniacs and it was quite expensive. I’ve also found a couple of them by simply calling down their series of check raises when they didn’t expect it, not giving the weak hand that had been raising the chance to fold. There’s a lot more information in the way hands played out than just weak hands raising.

&gt;&gt; I think to argue that I have a RIGHT to them to protect myself from collusion is a disingenous argument.

Rights? You want rights? You have a right to anything you can get. Period. That’s my take on that.

Disingenuous? Protecting myself from collusion? Ensuring a statistically balanced deal? Nah! Not showing the cards a player held while claiming it is to “clarify” the play of the hand. That’s disingenuous.


&gt;&gt; comments?

You asked for ‘em. You got some. I could go on and on, had I the time. This is a complex issue which can’t easily be summed up with a few short sentences, but I think, in the final analysis, that those hands must be available, even if it entails a few problems. I don’t see any way around it, and I won’t play on a site that does not provide them.