PP "juicing" vs. other sites

I'm a Ph.D. Psychologist, so I'm supposed to understand how people think and know a fair amount about statistics. I started a thread recently about whether sites are juicing the games (sorry to resurrect that, but I'm pretty interested in it). The camps are basically 1: the data do not support the hypothesis that PP is juicing - e.g. when players collect a number of hands that the distribution of the cards seems to be normal (great data analysis by the way). Or 2: "I've suffered so many unlikely bad beats that there must be some manipulation going on." I've suffered a number of statistically improbable bad beats recently as well. Psycholigically, when you've got the opponent by the short ones with only 2 outs on the river, you're counting your money already, and then the very unlikely (but entirely possible) happens, one of the 2 outs remaining comes up. Of course, we remember this for all time, and do not tend to remember the times that we were on the positive receiving end of an unlikely event in cards. Well either "that's poker", or maybe something is fishy. So I'm trained as a scientist and tend to believe the data, rather than my interpretations, but it's hard sometimes when I've been the victim of some outrageous beats in just one session.

Anyway, I brought up this thread because I was seeing a lot of "well, that's just Party Poker", when playing SNG and tourneys. It seemed like players were seeing this all the time at PP.

So my question is, is this reaction specific to Party Poker, or do players experience this on other sites? If other sites don't seem to have this reaction, or not nearly as much as at PP, then I'm going to consider switching where I bring my money to. I've done well at PP, having placed 1 and 2 in a couple of big tourneys, so I'm pretty stoked about being up a bunch, but do get pretty freaked out about this, even though I understand the data don't give credence to these subjective experiences.

So that's it, do players have similar experiences of being afraid that other sites besides Party, juices the game?

thanks for your thoughts.


zenpractice

[timprov]

They say that sort of thing everywhere. Most of them aren't even serious anymore -- it's so cliche they're using it ironically.

[Corey]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm supposed to...know a fair amount about statistics.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to consider switching where I bring my money to

[/ QUOTE ]

Every time a "why do fish play poker" post is made someone invariably talks about the PhD statistician who doesn't understand the basics of gambling. Congratulatioins, you are that guy.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

So my question is, is this reaction specific to Party Poker, or do players experience this on other sites?

[/ QUOTE ]


Happens everywhere.

Lots of times when somebody takes a supposed 'bad-beat' on Stars (which sometimes means they lost a 40/60 race...or they are just upset that when they finally get a good hand like KK someone else has AA) they will complain about it.

PokerStars has the well-known nickname 'RiverStars' supposedly because of all the bad-beats one gets on the river there (I just lost to a 2-outer on the river the other night...it's not THAT improbable....it would be more improbable if it never happened).

All the other sites are the same...played in a few tourneys on UB and a handful of those who busted out would come back in the chat-box and complain "this site is SOOOOO messed up" etc etc.

Many will even complain to customer-support because they are sure that their 'feel' for how the cards should run is enough for them to tell whether it's legit or not.
Generally, they're just bitter about losing.


On the PPM cruise all you could hear were various conversation about how the cards 'seem right on this site...but not so much so on that site' or 'they're not as random after 8pm...you can just TELL' etc etc.

I had two different guys tell me that I:
- better be careful. because the high-volume players are the ones they want to get rid of because all they do is take money from the fish.
- am EXACTLY the type of player party wants to see win...because my high-volume play helps keep the games going.


I got seated next to one of these guys the next day in the tourney and we watched some guy who was all-in land his 2-outer to avoid elimination and make the money.
I joked to the guy I had talked to earlier "see....it's just like an online-hand!!"
and he said in all seriousness "yeah...you're right...you never really see hands like that live."
Then he realize his contradiction (since we just HAD seen a hand like that live) and said "well...not nearly as much anyway."


In short: "Online poker is rigged" is frequently an excuse that people use to justify why they aren't winning as much as they should be (since they already KNOW that they're far better than 90% of their opponents).


Anyway - regardless of whether you still think the cards 'just aren't right' at party or not you do seem to be taking a somewhat analytical approach to the situation so that is commendable.

you say you've seen a number of crazy beats at party.

well...if you play again long enough I'm sure you'll also see a 1,000 hand stretch where very few beats happen and the better hand holds up MORE often than it should. Of course...the chances are that it will be such a boring stretch of hands you could fail notice it.

[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ] Quote:I'm supposed to...know a fair amount about statistics.

You don't.

Quote:

I'm going to consider switching where I bring my money to


Every time a "why do fish play poker" post is made someone invariably talks about the PhD statistician who doesn't understand the basics of gambling. Congratulatioins, you are that guy. [ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]


Well, maybe I am that guy (stupid fish), but you haven't answered my question, and your sarcasm is unwarranted. Do you have an opinion, or do you just want to cut people down to fell better about yourself? Also, I'm a Ph.D. Psychologist, not statistician. I understand some stats, but don't pretend to be a whiz, read my post and that should be clear.

I know this is a tiresome subject for folks, if it irks you, don't respond, otherwise I am interested in people's opinions.


zenpractice

[dlk9s]

Bad players have these fears at every site. They can't seem to understand all the reasons against "juicing."

On top of it, bad players don't understand that poker is gambling and that you are not going to win every time you start with the best hand.

And by no means am I saying I'm a very good player. Thank heavens for bonuses.

[krimson]

I used to bonuswhore so i've played on a ton of different sites. Every single site is the same...

*after a "bad beat"*
"Man, that is classic [insert site name], this site is so rigged"

[Corey]

I apologize for the cutting remarks, but they were, in my opinion, warranted. A psychologist should have a deep knowledge of statistics and I'm sure you are quite capable at performing statistical analyses. Understanding the basics, however, you seem to have failed.

Read MicroBob's post. His post really tells the entire story. There is a portion of the players at every site who think the game is rigged. This feeling seems to be greater at the lower and micro limits.

appreciate the response, Micro.


zen

corey, maybe I failed maybe not. I did talk about some of the data of hands analyzed and how they shake out as "normally distributed". I do understand randomness and how things are supposed to shake out over time, if that's what you mean. And I certainly understand that at any point, any card is as likely to come up as any other, it's just that over time we will see certain distributions. Thanks for the reprimand, though.