"Proof" Some Players Know What Cards Will Be Dealt!

[pzhon]

We weren't supposed to tell you, but here is the control sequence for setting the river card late in the tournament: Alt-F4, Enter, Alt-F4. This shows you the cards the other players have (but not who has which cards -- that wouldn't be fair). Select the river card you want from the remainder.

Since other players will also be using this, you need to enter the control code quickly. When the pot is large, get your left hand poised to press Alt-F4, and your right hand poised to press Enter, and you can type it really rapidly.

[sexypanda]

[ QUOTE ]
We weren't supposed to tell you, but here is the control sequence for setting the river card late in the tournament: Alt-F4, Enter, Alt-F4. This shows you the cards the other players have (but not who has which cards -- that wouldn't be fair). Select the river card you want from the remainder.

Since other players will also be using this, you need to enter the control code quickly. When the pot is large, get your left hand poised to press Alt-F4, and your right hand poised to press Enter, and you can type it really rapidly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, thats so last week. When there are 50 players left in a tournament, all you have to do is type in "GOD MODE" in all caps in the chat box, then press Shift+Enter. If you do this correctly all cards are dealt face up and the flop, turn, and river are pre-dealt so you know if you're going to win.

This is a pretty big secret, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't tell everyone about it.

[Gregg777]

Ralphie,

When you run through one of those brutal peroids of always getting sucked out you start to see ghosts...

But to answer your question directly regarding tournaments and final tables and the players seeming to know what will fall, did you watch last week's WPT where Danny Nguyen won?

He won 8 or 9 major hands, only one of them was he ahead when he went all in. It was by far the worst suckout session I have ever seen on TV.

In one hand he had to hit running sevens, which he did.

In another he had to hit his gutshot, and he did. But what is even crazier about this hand is the other player is the one who went all in, indicating a made hand, yet Danny still called with the gutshot, and still hit his miracle on the river.

On the final hand he calls his opponent's all in with just 43 off and hits a 3 on the river.

We can go watch whatever tournaments you want, but they will never top this one, and it wasn't fixed. That's just how it is...

[sethypooh21]

[imported_tubalcain]

I guess it's kinda old news by now, but for those who missed it, the fact has been revealed that many poker players of Asian, especially Vietnamese origin, practice a sophisticated method of mental visualization not unlike the Neuro Linguistic Programming. Basically, they go deep within for answers preflop and postflop they visualize the cards to come. This involves an ancient method of breathing of meditation and the Nguyen clan is known to have been initiated into this tradition long before poker. It has also been rumored that Gus Hansen became an adept during his visit to Vietnam and after winning the Tournament of Champions where he singlehandedly busted out every single opponents, invariably with a lucky river card, Gus Hansen more or less publicly acknowledged that his success is due to breathing and making pictures in his mind.
I strongly suspect that some online players somehow managed to get hold of this powerful mental weapons and those on the lower limits are simply building their bankrolls.

The absence of proof is not the proof of absence.

[Lampsteen]

<font color="red"> </font> This is sort of on this subject, but something that has been debated among our group of players for a long time. How easy would it be to rig games online, or at minimum skew things to your liking?
I know I'm probably the millionth person to say this on here, but since I'm relatively new to the site, I'll put my two cents in.
All you need is a group at the same table (a group being anywhere from two people and upward that know each other) with either "Nextel type" cellphones or just simply logged in to a IM service. What keeps one person (or more) from telling the other that they folded "xyz" and that they must have the nuts. To me, a ring game could really be rigged.
Furthermore, what keeps someone from having 4 different PC's in there "room" and having 4 different ISP's? That would mask the fact that it is the same person. Call me a skeptic, but I really think these sites are really open to being "not so legit". Again, I apologize for probably repeating a possibly dead idea. [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[Kevin K.]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> </font> This is sort of on this subject, but something that has been debated among our group of players for a long time. How easy would it be to rig games online, or at minimum skew things to your liking?
I know I'm probably the millionth person to say this on here, but since I'm relatively new to the site, I'll put my two cents in.
All you need is a group at the same table (a group being anywhere from two people and upward that know each other) with either "Nextel type" cellphones or just simply logged in to a IM service. What keeps one person (or more) from telling the other that they folded "xyz" and that they must have the nuts. To me, a ring game could really be rigged.
Furthermore, what keeps someone from having 4 different PC's in there "room" and having 4 different ISP's? That would mask the fact that it is the same person. Call me a skeptic, but I really think these sites are really open to being "not so legit". Again, I apologize for probably repeating a possibly dead idea. [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

A winning player 4-tabling straight-up can earn much more than four people fumblef'ing around trying to run one table. Even the example of one person with a bunch of accounts, PC's, ISP's, etc. would just be too much of a hassle.

How can three or four people sitting at one or two tables sharing hole cards and splitting up the winnings be more profitable than those same three or four people playing a total of 12, 24, 48 tables or whatever on their own? I imagine that a group couldn't play more than one or two tables and still communicate effectively without somebody timing out every other hand.

If money were your only motive and you were given the option of playing 8 tables of 3/6 at 1.5 BB/100 on your own or playing 2 tables of 30/60 along with three partners for a cumulative 2.4 BB/100, which would you choose? They both earn you the same amount of money, but now you need to coordinate the schedules of four people, rotate multiple accounts in and out to avoid being detected, etc. It's not practical.

Think this through once as though you were going to actually do it. Plan it out and think about what you need to do just to get started. Calculate how much money you would expect to make vs. how much you would make if you just play winning poker on your own.

This is why I can't believe how many people over at RGP haven't figured out that Russ G. is just trolling. He's got way too much time on his hands, but it's great stuff, lol. Pictures of elaborate "boiler room" setups, etc.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]


Today I offer you the best "proof" I am willing/able to share that some players know the flop/turn/river before they are dealt. When the field is down to about 50 players I swear at least half of them have some way of knowing/controlling what cards will be dealt. Just watch the play closely at this point in the tournament and tell me these guys don't know something the rest of us don't. It won't take long for you to come to the same conclusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is your best "proof"??? Your "proof" is that the people who win the pots are the ones who hit their draws? Did it ever occur to you that some of those players are drawing to those hands because they know that they have the proper odds? Did it ever occur to you that a player correctly drawing to multiple outs is more likely to hit his hand and win the pot than some dolt drawing to a 2-outer that isn't likely to win if he hits it?

[ QUOTE ]
On Party we could easily record the hand histories for all hands dealt at the final four tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

On Party you can request that those hand histories be sent to you, and you can analyse them for statistical irregularities to "prove" your assertions. What do you think you are going to see in observing these games? Do you think that some cheater will type in chat, "The river will be the 9c, completing my inside straight-flush draw"?

[ QUOTE ]
Just watch the play closely at this point in the tournament and tell me these guys don't know something the rest of us don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do know something that you don't know: how to play the game, and the underlying mathematical principles of the game. The only possible "proof" your proposed observation could come up with is that the results of these hands are statistically highly improbable. What you propose is a meaninglessly small sample size to do that.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really appreciate people disrupting a legitimate thread with posts calling me or others losers because we choose to investigate this matter with an open mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

To prevent outside interference with your investigation, I highly recommend that you and your associates wear tin-foil beanies. Those guys who "know" the next card can also jam your brain-waves so you can't recognise what they are doing.



And remember, shiny side out.

[Klepton]

i got a good theory:

you suck at poker

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that some cheater will type in chat, "The river will be the 9c, completing my inside straight-flush draw"?

[/ QUOTE ]
I imagine it would be fun to type something like that in the chat once in a while. No more than once per session. Because once in a while the card would actually come and someone at the table would freak out.