People who think online is rigged...

[ QUOTE ]
i do notice i always start good with a new game, ring, sng, etc. it's just strange, that's all. like i'm being lured in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. Joined a new poker site, turned it from 100 to 680, getting great cards ... and after that it went all down hill. Once again, not saying its the site, but its something I've noticed.

[Komodo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i do notice i always start good with a new game, ring, sng, etc. it's just strange, that's all. like i'm being lured in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. Joined a new poker site, turned it from 100 to 680, getting great cards ... and after that it went all down hill. Once again, not saying its the site, but its something I've noticed.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is mathematically expected that most players who start out as big winners or winners will end up as losers because of the rake. Many people dont understand that.

[MicroBob]

and on the other side: many players who drop $100 to start do not re-deposit.

so if you're going to have variance where you're +600 and then -600 you will be able to do that.
but if you're variance on a given site was potentially going to be -600 and THEN +600 then there is a chance you might not stick around long enough to realize the 'come-back'.


in other words: every losing player is going to have win streaks.

those who have the win streaks at the start are going to keep playing obviously and think they are a good player. they will keep playing until they lose their money (which is inevitable if they are playing an inferior game).
then they think something happened from the site's end. well...they ran well to start...and then stopped catching good cards. no biggie.


those who lose when they start are less likely to redeposit...and are less likely to talk about it.
but those who do redeposit will eventually hit a winning streak. at that point they will think they have finally figured it out and know how to play better (even if it's only after 300 hands) then they'll go back to losing again...but now they'll KNOW that it was because the site threw the switch on them and MADE them lose. because their previous win-streak has now convinced them that they are a winning player.


I suspect 80-90% of poker-players would say they are at least 'break-even to winning' players...even though this is obviously impossible.

[SNOWBALL138]

Intelligent people in society think differently than intelligent poker players. People don't understand randomness or expectation because they don't use these concepts in their workplace or everyday decisions.

[SNOWBALL138]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's a cop-out to just say that all these people are 'stupid'.
They're clearly are not THAT stupid.
Many are college-educated...have jobs...even as doctors, lawyers, psychologists, whatever.


[/ QUOTE ]

Part of whats happening is that people experience gambling decisions emotionally, and are confused by the meaning of their results, as well as the game itself. Instead of thinking "I have no idea whats going on" they pretend that they understand whats going on. They make up stories that can help them to explain events that are confusing, and emotionally intense (sometimes traumatic). Its a little more complicated than Voltaire's "god shaped void", but the principle is somewhat similar.

Also, sometimes people just want something to talk about. People will spit out any variety of canard to make conversations. Monkey see monkey do. Sometimes the smart monkeys take cues from the dumber monkeys, because its no big deal if they're wrong. People don't go into gambling environments to exchange meaningful ideas.

[ QUOTE ]
Part of whats happening is that people experience gambling decisions emotionally, and are confused by the meaning of their results, as well as the game itself. Instead of thinking "I have no idea whats going on" they pretend that they understand whats going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is particularly insightful.

I experienced something vaguely similar to this last night when I was playing a home game with some friends. We started talking about Tiffany Williamson at the WSOP when one my friends asserted that this woman "knew what the hell she was doing."

I scoffed, and the guy came back with, "Well, she's a lawyer so she can't be stupid."

It occured to me that this guy simply didn't have enough understanding of NLHE to accurately assess anyone else's skill level. He simply saw Williamson's results and reasoned that this was an indication of good play.

I think the "she must be good because she's a lawyer" line of thought further illuminate's Snowball's comment. Doctors, lawyers, accountants...etc start playing this game and assume that their intelligence gives them an automatic edge over other players. When their results don't back this up, they engage in conspiracy theories to explain the discrepency.

Everyone that truly thinks online poker is rigged, should regularly read this blog.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]

They're clearly are not THAT stupid.
Many are college-educated...have jobs...even as doctors, lawyers, psychologists, whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]


Don't forget that there are many college-educated people - that have jobs - even in the fields that you mentioned - that many, I'm sure, would consider "stupid" when it comes to lots of facets of life.

As far as the topic goes, I've played at all sorts of sites and, like many I'm sure, I've done better at some than others so ... I just play where I've done better. I don't blame it on the site being rigged, rather that my play style (or my opponents' lack thereof) "fits" best in certain places.

And for the naysayers, I've tried dozens of sites and all of them have shoved more money into my Neteller account than I ever shoved them in the first place. Countless others can say the same.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

[Pinky]

One thing that used to bother me was losing after flopping a straight. Example, I have KJ and flop is AQ10 with a flush draw. After losing this type of hand, it usually made me suspicious.

But I realize now, it's not so crazy. On the turn/river, I don't want to see 9 cards to pair the board, 6 cards to make my straight obvious and scare people away from the pot, 6 other cards if there was a flush draw. So basically 21 out of 47 cards won't make me happy.

If I have 78 and the board is 910J, obviously that's a lot worse. Many people don't understand how vulnerable a flopped straight is.

It's strange. I have a friend who is very smart, does great academically and all the rest of it. He is also a very good poker player. I once saw him vigorously berate a player who complained that poker is rigged.

However, recently he messaged me with a hot tip: In Stud/8 games on Stars, the 2 seat on Stars is the "good" seat. Swear to god. Every time he sits there (he claims) he doubles his buyin in an hour, and he won't sit at a table unless he can sit there. This is ONLY for stud/8 cash games, ONLY on stars.

It seems that superstition is a very common trait amongst poker players, even very skilled, very intelligent ones. It seems to have no harmful affect on your poker game at all. Maybe it's even benificial as it helps keep up self-confidence and you avoid second-guessing yourself.

I don't know. It's very strange.