Do you believe the shuffle is really random online???

[Hoi Polloi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. We do know that in the past people have figured out ways to predict the hole cards or cards yet to be dealt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you please document this claim?

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't think so.

[FNG]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. We do know that in the past people have figured out ways to predict the hole cards or cards yet to be dealt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you please document this claim?

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't think so.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.developer.com/tech/article.php/616221

Just jumping in here because I thought this was common knowledge. Apparently not.

[Tao]

(humor)
The CIA is running a poker boiler room in Alexandria, VA using the combined computing power available to the NSA with the express intent of causing bad beats to all those young men and women who are playing poker online instead of enlisting in the war against Terra'
This hijacking of computing power also has had the adverse effect of being the reason the US has not been able to find Bin Laden and associates. Perhaps Bin Laden is logging on from his cave in Afghanistan as Bad_Beat_Buddy
LOL [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[JayPaav]

the thing is, what ralphie is saying has nothing to do with the poker sites making any more money than they already are. he's talking about ppl who have figured out some codes to the software where it has become easier for them to call down hands that may be questionable because they know the software will deal a certain card/cards/hand.

[JayPaav]

exactly... if i sit out a few hands when im playing online.. then get a hand that looks decent, i know im in for something - whether its a hit or a draw on the flop... i just know that the software understands it's my turn (the position that i'm in's turn) to get a hand.

[6471849653]

There is the field of results that has spots of losing streaks; when first starting to play one is unlikely to run into many of those spots, but the longer one plays the more likely one is to step on those losing (as well as winning) streaks that are longer and longer the longer one has been playing.

The randomness has partly to do with above but one other view is to know the odds that tell that one should be winning some hands like 3 or 4 times out of five, so one should be seeing winnings and then an occasional lose, that won't then bother because of all that winnings.

One can verify that by the odds as well as dealing out hands from a real deck and seeing it really should be so.

There are sites where it looks like one is not getting those odds, but on the long run one is still winning what one should. One likely is not seeing the odds because one is not putting it on note every time when one did win that hand that will be sucked out or so 20% or so, and the different styles of play at different limits and places.

One can also compare how the cards come out at different sites if it looks normal, then not play if one doesn't think so; there are other sites to choose from. But I have been playing at three sites now where the cards do not look like coming out normally but the long run results are still what they should be.

[Tao]

Having given this subject a bit more thought and observation of hands dealt on PP and watching poker tourneys on TV, I have observed similar "random-non-random" events in both. For example, on PP, I was dealt a "6" in the pocket on seven straight hands. There was also a "6" somewhere in the flop for some of those hands. I also observed on TV, one player get 55, then in the next hand a different player gets 55, and the 5 also came up in the flop.
Chaos theory will combine with random perfection thereby creating the illusion of order.
You can get really paranoid if you think "they" are watching you, "they" have singled you out, and you think that you are important enough for "them" to mess with your head.
Peace.

[Carl_William]

Hopefully, the shuffles on your Internet poker site are quasi pseudo random. That is the quality of the pseudo random numbers and shuffling technique is good enough to do the job; that is it is equally fair to all of the poker players. Today, it is easy to produce these fair deals. But it is also easy to cheat. Hopefully your Internet poker site can be trusted and is always honest.

Some people believe that the leading Internet poker sites are making lots of money and they don't have to revert to cheating and possibly get a bad reputation. The truth is; there is always the danger of cheating. I have seen it and/or experienced it many times in both home games, and in casinos. The odds of being cheated or conned in a home game where you don’t know the players is probably about 95 percent – that is just the way it is. There is also many ways to be cheated in casinos – believe me: “MANY.”

[ThinkQuick]

[ QUOTE ]
The odds of being cheated or conned in a home game where you don’t know the players is probably about 95 percent

[/ QUOTE ]

I challenge!

[chauncey134]

In this debate, site proponents always say the sites have nothing to gain. I don't understand this comment. Considering shills, rake, and new player longevity; I would think the sites stand to gain millions a day. So quit with the, "They have nothing to gain crap".