Private Profiles - an update on how they will be changing here
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.

• Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,073

Well that's as maybe, but where online poker is concerned, they are not doing it. [1]

[1] Citation needed

• Closed Accounts Posts: 2,697

Actually computers have always struggled with precise random number generation

and earlier hand example AA v 72 rainbow, 72 wins 12% of the time, if the 72 is suited the 16.5% - which is a 6/1 shot in a 2 horse race

AA is the best pocket pair but by no means a certainty every time

• Closed Accounts Posts: 214 ✭✭

marco_polo wrote: »
[1] Citation needed

Just go and look for yourself. Open your eyes and you won't miss it.
john47832 wrote: »
16.5% - which is a 6/1 shot in a 2 horse race

5/1

• Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭✭

5/1

6.06/1....;)

• Registered Users Posts: 4,817 ✭✭✭

Just go and look for yourself. Open your eyes and you won't miss it.

5/1

All we can find are idiots waffling on like you are without any actual "evidence", since it soooo easy to find, why don't you provide some credible sources?

You're not going too? I wonder why that is.... :rolleyes:

• Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭

SlowJack wrote: »
6.06/1....;)

16.5% = 165/1000
165 = ~ 1/6 * 1000

83.5% = 835/1000
835 = ~ 5/6 * 1000

83.5 : 16.5 = ~5 : 1 = 5/1

(5.06/1)

• Registered Users Posts: 37,145 ✭✭✭✭

SlowJack wrote: »
6.06/1....;)
If you are going to most something smart at least make sure you are right.

16.5% is roughly 1 time in every 6 (1 in every 6.0600)
That means its a 5/1 shot, not a 6/1 shot.

1 time in 2 is an even money shot or 1/1, it isn't 2/1

This has to be one of the owrst threads on the forum.

• Closed Accounts Posts: 214 ✭✭

nix wrote: »
All we can find are idiots waffling on like you are without any actual "evidence", since it soooo easy to find, why don't you provide some credible sources?

You're not going too? I wonder why that is.... :rolleyes:

Thanks. If you're not seeing it, there's really nothing I can do for you.

• Closed Accounts Posts: 214 ✭✭

nix wrote: »
You're not going too? I wonder why that is.... :rolleyes:

Going where too? Let me know where it is and I'll tell you if I'll go too.

• Registered Users Posts: 4,817 ✭✭✭

Provide links to credible sources.... thought that was obvious..

And oh look, I was right

Just you talking out your ass.......AGAIN

• Registered Users Posts: 4,817 ✭✭✭

Wait i think you may be right about it being rigged,

Source: http://www.billrini.com/2004/11/30/proof-that-online-poker-is-rigged/

:rolleyes:

• Closed Accounts Posts: 2,697

Mellor wrote: »
If you are going to most something smart at least make sure you are right .

Mellor wrote: »
This has to be one of the owrst threads on the forum.

:rolleyes:

lmao with the irony, i nearly fell off the chair

• Registered Users Posts: 37,145 ✭✭✭✭

john47832 wrote: »

:rolleyes:

lmao with the irony, i nearly fell off the chair
The poster make a smart comment about it being 6.06/1
His whole point was wrong. He doesn't understand odds.

Mine was a typo. Quite common really. I am actually aware how to spell worst.

If you can't see the difference then its not surprising you have trouble keeping you balance while sitting in the chair.

• Registered Users Posts: 3,234 ✭✭✭

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

• Closed Accounts Posts: 214 ✭✭

nix wrote: »
Wait i think you may be right about it being rigged,

Source: http://www.billrini.com/2004/11/30/proof-that-online-poker-is-rigged/

:rolleyes:

Lol, you really are new to this aren't you.
Dave147 wrote: »
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Depends on connection speed.

• Closed Accounts Posts: 2,697

Mellor wrote: »

Mine was a typo. Quite common really. I am actually aware how to spell worst.
.

Yes typos are common - even happened to me once, but when you are having a go at the content quality of others posts then at least ensure you own is up to standard

• Closed Accounts Posts: 2,697

Depends on connection speed.

i was going to add confused to his comment - but which algorithm did you use to decipher that post

• Registered Users Posts: 37,145 ✭✭✭✭

john47832 wrote: »
Yes typos are common - even happened to me once, but when you are having a go at the content quality of others posts then at least ensure you own is up to standard
If I was having a go at the spelling, then my own typo would of been quite ironic.
But I referred to the fact that the "correction" was completely wrong. So I don't think it's all that funny. A bit unfortunate.

You forgot the R in YOUR above. Again not massively funny, just unfortunate given the post it's in.

• Registered Users Posts: 37,145 ✭✭✭✭

john47832 wrote: »

Depends on connection speed.

i was going to add confused to his comment - but which algorithm did you use to decipher that post
Lol, my thoughts too.
I've read it a few times now and I'm still lost

• Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭

• Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,073

• Registered Users Posts: 4,817 ✭✭✭

Lol, you really are new to this aren't you.

Depends on connection speed.

No, that's all i could find when i went looking for "proof that online poker is rigged", it just highlights my point that you're talking out your ass and YOU haven't got a clue what you're talking about with your claims.

And yet again you prevail in failing to support your claims, /golfclap

• Closed Accounts Posts: 2,697

That picture is not valid nuxx - how can twiceasright have won 24000 from previous pot when the blinds and ante combine to at least 34000

• Registered Users Posts: 7,706

john47832 wrote: »
That picture is not valid nuxx - how can twiceasright have won 24000 from previous pot when the blinds and ante combine to at least 34000

I doubt its validity either but not for the reason you have stated, twiceasright was the sb in the last hand so he obv raised , bb folded and he thus won the bb + 4 antes which equals 24,000

• Closed Accounts Posts: 2,697

I doubt its validity either but not for the reason you have stated, twiceasright was the sb in the last hand so he obv raised , bb folded and he thus won the bb + 4 antes which equals 24,000

so your saying the chips twiceasright has put in are not included in the win?

then in that case the win should be 23,000 - no?

• Registered Users Posts: 11,106

You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It’s just common sense

• Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭

lol

• Registered Users Posts: 37,145 ✭✭✭✭

I doubt its validity either but not for the reason you have stated, twiceasright was the sb in the last hand so he obv raised , bb folded and he thus won the bb + 4 antes which equals 24,000
That wouldn't of happened, the pot would of been bigger had SB of raised.

He was BB last hand. It was folded to him, so 10,000 was refunded (the extra in for the BB over the SB), the pot was 4 x 1000 antes, SB's 10,000 and his match of SBs amount = 24,000
john47832 wrote: »
so your saying the chips twiceasright has put in are not included in the win?

then in that case the win should be 23,000 - no?

As above, he was BB.
Antes are also separate to blinds so they would of counted.

Its a fake. But not for those reasons.
It's a screen shot of two tourneys plus a fake chat box

• Registered Users Posts: 3,234 ✭✭✭

Mellor wrote: »
Lol, my thoughts too.
I've read it a few times now and I'm still lost