|
|
#41
11-21-2004, 12:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A \'Must Read\' Post above ^
Yes, no public company has EVER been dishonest....well...... except for ENRON, SunBeam, Quest, and a few others...
Puh-lease human nature is human nature. Some people will cheat, lie, and steal to make extra money. Is there something ***MAGICAL*** about Empire/Party which makes them more honest than others. Gaming commissions were created because SOME casinos CHEATED THEIR customers!!!! Jeez...are you going to say, "uhhhhh but cheating customers was not in the casinos best interest...uhhhhhh". It is time to leave the land of make believe.... Like I said. I trust Pokerstars/Prima. I do NOT trust Empire/Party. Too many weird things have happen to me at Empire/Party. I'm not saying they are crooked BUT I NO LONGER FEEL SAFE PLAYING there. I started with a $100 at Pokerstars, and I now have a have a five figure bankroll from playing on-line. I have EASILY played over a 300,000 on-line hands under my belt on several different sites. So I have a little experience regarding on-line play. My bankroll swings at Empire/Party were NOTHING like I experienced at other sites... Too many strange cards seemed to be hitting... Maybe my experiences at Empire/Party were just random chance BUT...like I said I no longer feel safe playing there... By the way, I ONLY play NLHE, where fish NORMALLY get deep fried.... 
|
|
#42
11-21-2004, 12:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Feeding the Fish Theory
The "Feeding the Fish" hypothesis also has the advantage where fewer hands would have to be manipulated. This makes is tougher for a smart statistician to catch them....
I don't think fish would need as much protection in LIMIT as they would in NO-LIMIT. In limit the fish get bled slowly and the house collects the rakes the whole way. In NO-Limit a fish can get clean out in ONE hand and the house ONLY gets a rake of $3..... Fish protection would be more needed in NL than limit.....
|
|
#43
11-21-2004, 01:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A \'Must Read\' Post above ^
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, no public company has EVER been dishonest....well...... except for ENRON, SunBeam, Quest, and a few others... [/ QUOTE ] You named several companies that were unprofitable companies and committed fraud so they could appear profitable (I'm assuming you mean Qwest, not "Quest"). So is your point that PartyPoker would be unprofitable unless it was fixing games? The largest site with the highest rake on the net? Then you would also be making the point that all online poker sites must be unprofitable, since none have the economies of scale and customer base of PP. PP has a license to print money just by running their business honestly, which will also lead to the license to print even more money in an IPO. Is it impossible they've endangered all of this by cheating? No, nothing is impossible, but some things are very unlikely. The funny part is that the reason wierd things happen to you at Empire/Party is very obvious, and you don't even get it. Frankly I'm glad you're so obtuse and really have no need to clue you in on what you are missing. But I will tell you until you figure this out, you'll never have a chance of being a top level poker player.
|
|
#46
11-21-2004, 02:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A \'Must Read\' Post above ^
"So is your point that PartyPoker would be unprofitable unless it was fixing games?"
*****Uhhhhhh no.....I never said that.... I NEVER mentioned PP profitability. Soooooooooooo.....how could you imply that was my point???? My point was, human nature does not change and GREED can cause some people to do unthical things to make more money. For example, casinos removing 10 points cards from decks to increase their blackjack winnings.... Gaming comissions have caught casinos doing this before... But this is impossible right? Casinos would NEVER cheat to increase their winnings... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] "Then you would also be making the point that all online poker sites must be unprofitable, since none have the economies of scale and customer base of PP." ****Huh.....how did you make this leap in "logic"? Did you even read my post? "The funny part is that the reason wierd things happen to you at Empire/Party is very obvious, and you don't even get it." ****It must be nice to be so insightful.... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] With such magical skills, perhaps you should be a full time poker consultant. "Frankly I'm glad you're so obtuse and really have no need to clue you in on what you are missing." *****LOL....I'm glad that you're glad. Have pity on MERE poker mortals such as myself. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] "But I will tell you until you figure this out, you'll never have a chance of being a top level poker player." ****LOL....I don't recall ever saying being a top level poker player is one of my goals, but ANSWER THIS QUESTION: What qualifications do YOU HAVE that which gives you the ability to say who CAN and who CAN NOT be a "top level poker player". Perhaps you are a top level poker player? Hmmmmmmm..... Wait...are you Greg Raymer ****ing with me? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] LOL...All kidding aside, I found your reply to be VERY EMOTIONAL. Why does *MY* lack of trust towards Empire/Party Poker upset you so much? If you want to play there, then play there. It does not matter to me.... I've seen previous posts attacking the trustworthiness of Partypoker and there seems to be an ARMY of FLAMERS who attack these infidels who dare to speak badly about PartyPoker.... The hostile reactions to these types of posts are fascinating....
|
|
#47
11-21-2004, 03:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Feeding the Fish Theory
Actually in statistics you can never TECHNICAL "prove" anything but with large enough sample sizes you can make VERY, VERY, VERY accurate inferences.... For example whether PartyPoker was likely rigging hands and likely NOT rigging hands.....
Also I should call it the "Feed the Fish" hypothesis. For in science, the highest levels of scientific knowledge are LAWS and THEORIES. To become a theory in science requires some MAJOR MAJOR effort and experimentation and validation.... If a scientist can one day publish a THEORY, then he/she is almost automatically getting a nobel prize... Anyway......if PartyPoker was rigging hands , Statistics COULD be used to bust them. With the "feed the Fish" hypothesis where only certain strategic hands are rigged....a much larger sample size would be needed. So by "tougher" I mean a VERY large Sample size would be needed.... I would argue 250K hands would be too small... ***If math bores you then STOP READING**** To estimate the mimimum sample size for Texas Hold'em I like to use the AA versus KK match up. *The odds of being dealt AA are 220:1 *The odds of an AA/KK matchup is roughly 20:1 *A decent size sample size for measureing the AA/KK matchup is about 100....but of course a larger sample size is better. So using round numbers 220 x 20 x 100 = 440,000 hands. Mmmmmmm....I don't know about you, but I don't have that many hands in my Poker Tracker... And I only have about 25,000 hands of Empire in my data base (I only bought PT a couple of months ago)...
|
|
#48
11-21-2004, 05:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A \'Must Read\' Post above ^
".... I've seen previous posts attacking the trustworthiness of Partypoker and there seems to be an ARMY of FLAMERS who attack these infidels who dare to speak badly about PartyPoker.... The hostile reactions to these types of posts are fascinating.... "
I know exactly what you are talking about here. The reason for it is quite understandable. There are a lot of folks that have no life outside Party Poker. They spend 12 hours a day grinding out some bucks and I come along and suggest that they are DUPES! I'm attacking their entire existance. They must defend it, logic be damned. I understand.
|
|
#49
11-21-2004, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Feeding the Fish Theory
There's a ton of 'hocus pokus' in your statistical sample size dissertation. I'd dare say a decent sample size would be a couple thousand hands to get some worthwhile info, assuming there is a skew. You will also see something after checking a couple hundred hands that will motivate you to gather more data.
The big problem is what to do with the results? These folks are playing for high stakes and life is fairly cheap in India or where ever. Here's what I did with my experimental results. I cashed out my Party and Empire accounts. That's it. I can not use the info to improve my position in the games so I quit, except for bonuses now and then. Find me at UB.
|
|
#50
11-22-2004, 12:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Theories on how online poker is rigged?
[ QUOTE ]
This is more or less exactly what I believe and also believe I uncovered at Empire. Would be nice if someone else checked my work. [/ QUOTE ] You were asked to supply your results here the last time (several months ago) this discussion was aired. You refused.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
