Is SnG rigged?

Amaru

Has anybody else any views on this? I play a lot of STTs, but recently i've ventured into SnG to see what the returns are like(this is on VC). The hands coming out are obscene! Its like the play money tables. In one hour sessions, i counted 18 flushes! Somebody told me before that they give good hands to drive up the pots, thereby they make money on the rake, and i'd be inclined to agree. Am i wrong? Is it just a coincidence(i've actually seen this numerous times, not a once off)? And is it just on VC?

Dub13

They dont take a rake from STT just a registration so they dont care how big the pots are in STT.Maybe they want them over faster.

Culchie

Oh Oh, you mentioned the 'R' word.

Be prepared to be feel the wrath of the Pokah Gods !



P.S Isn't a STT the same as a SnG ?

PPP-Pit Boss

Amaru wrote:

Has anybody else any views on this? I play a lot of STTs, but recently i've ventured into SnG to see what the returns are like(this is on VC). The hands coming out are obscene! Its like the play money tables. In one hour sessions, i counted 18 flushes! Somebody told me before that they give good hands to drive up the pots, thereby they make money on the rake, and i'd be inclined to agree. Am i wrong? Is it just a coincidence(i've actually seen this numerous times, not a once off)? And is it just on VC?

Can we just refer this thread back to one of the other 500? Dont leave out from the equation the amount of hands DEALT.

Iago

depends what level you were watching. At the lower levels in VC there is a lot of loose play. you see more "big" hands simply because players won't drop their 3 to a flush draws on the flop (yes, yes I know, I was one of those players...sorry again DeV) and so on.

Therefore you see more big hands than you would normally see. I'll give you an example, playing a .10/.20 cash game on VC the other day, I was playing an MTT and I normally sit at a cash game at the same time to keep me involved...

anywayI'm in middle position, everyone limps around to me and I raise to $1, I get 4 callers.

Flop comes down A J 7 rainbow, checked to me and I check with two players to act after me.

Next player makes it $5 to go and the player after that goes all-in for $25, it's folded to me. I call $25 and the initial raiser goes all-in for another $15

So we're on the flop on a .10/.20 table the pot is worth $109...the hands

First raiser ; KQs to match the 7 clubs
Second raiser; JTo for a pair of J's
Me: AA for trip aces

7 on the turn and I've a full house, and take a substantial pot with a big hand, that should never have materialised because they should have folded

it's not rigged, just too many players who won't lay down a hand and who are willing to chase cards all the way to the river.

henbane

OMFG its RIGGED!!!!! RIGGED i tells ya......wtf? roflmao! lucky fsh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111111one

Amaru wrote:

Am i wrong?

Yes

Amaru

Fine, i'm wrong then. Just asking.

And isn't 18 flushes in an hour not a little high? Its not just flushes either. Its houses, quads etc. Two pair RARELY wins it for you, and trips is a stretch. And its not the loose play either. Almost EVERY hand, the flop comes down 2 to a suit, and the river will pretty much always round it out. Either that, or the other suit will hit on the turn and the river.

And by SnG, i mean the real money tables, not STT. I've always thought that was SnG. They do take a rake on real money, right? And its not ALL online i think is rigged, just the real money. STT seems fine.

Davey Devil

Amaru wrote:

And by SnG, i mean the real money tables, not STT. I've always thought that was SnG. They do take a rake on real money, right?

??? :eek:

STT: Single Table Tournament
SnG: Sit and Go

These are both the same. Can be played both for play money and real money.

The registration fee is usually 10% on STT's.

I'm not even going to address the rigging accusations.

Edit: What stakes are you playing at?

Amaru

I thought real money was sit and go, because you can just sit down and play, instead of having to wait for the other players to register. Simple mistake to make.

And i don't think online in general is rigged, just specifically real money. And i'm playing pretty low stakes.

Davey Devil

Amaru wrote:

I thought real money was sit and go, because you can just sit down and play, instead of having to wait for the other players to register. Simple mistake to make.

You will see all sorts of crap at low stakes tables. Lots more hands get played to their conclusion, loads of players drawing to straights and flushes. It's simply the stanard of game that you are plating that's the problem not the site.

And i don't think online in general is rigged, just specifically real money. And i'm playing pretty low stakes.

Well if they were rigging they are hardly going to go to the bother of rigging play money are they?

Amaru

Davey Devil wrote:

You will see all sorts of crap at low stakes tables. Lots more hands get played to their conclusion, loads of players drawing to straights and flushes. It's simply the stanard of game that you are plating that's the problem not the site.

That still wouldn't account for the discrepancy between STT and real money. I don't play higher than 3 and 5 dollar stts right now(about the equivalent stakes of my real money table), and people are just as reckless. So really, my question isn't "is real money rigged", its why is there such a difference in the hand distributions in stt and real money?

Culchie

That hole is getting deeper and deeper ..... stop digging.

henbane

OK, here's what we've got: the Rand Corporation, in conjunction with the saucer people, under the supervision of the reverse vampires are creating action flops in a fiendish plot to increase the rake. We're through the looking glass, here, people...

Amaru

Just to clarify, i'm not complaining because of some bad beat. If its rigged, then you can take advantage of this if you're disciplined enough, and i have in the several occasions i've played it. I just want to know if anybody could suggest a reason for the difference.

PPP-Pit Boss

henbane wrote:

OK, here's what we've got: the Rand Corporation, in conjunction with the saucer people, under the supervision of the reverse vampires are creating action flops in a fiendish plot to increase the rake. We're through the looking glass, here, people...

He He he.
HENBANE IS RIGGED!

Davey Devil

Amaru wrote:

That still wouldn't account for the discrepancy between STT and real money. I don't play higher than 3 and 5 dollar stts right now(about the equivalent stakes of my real money table), and people are just as reckless. So really, my question isn't "is real money rigged", its why is there such a difference in the hand distributions in stt and real money?

Ok. Lets start again. STT can be played at play and real money.

Now I haven't played play money for years but I'm sure the standards are horrific, therefore you will see far more royal flushes etc because people are playing any suited connecters to raise and so forth.

In real money STT's the standard is probably just as bad at low levels, even the 10 dollar games can make you cry with the amount of muppetry. However generally the play is much tighter than play money. People don't call raises without big hands and can lay down a good hand on the flop if they feel they are behind. Therefore the board doesn't get to the river anywhere near as much in a decent standard real money STT as it does in a play money one. Also you get as many players involved in a hand in real money. Less cards means less combinations = not as many flushes, straights etc.

There is [NO] differences in software the differences are in the quality of the players.

DeVore

The difference you *perceive*. Unless you could analyse it and show a variance thats outside an acceptible threshhold then noone can suggest an explanation.

If you think that Party Poker or Poker Stars or whoever ARENT analysing each others RNG's and stats, you are mad. I'd bet they analyse each others data to bits because if one of them (say MyBolloxPoker.com) could prove, *prove* that something skewed was happening to the expected normal distribution over a good sized sample set from their competitors site... well, bye bye competitor!

Now, if that competitor happened to be PartyPoker, well... say hello to about 45% of the market thats now up for grabs, as they crash out of business under 100 million class action lawsuits!! Can we say ChaChing!.

So there is a HUGE incentive for competition to analyse each other and yet... whats that I hear? Crickets chirping? Unless of course ALL the sites are at it, and have some giantic conspiracy....possibly including the FREEMASONS!!!

I've done it, I've solved the mystery I can expose the conspiracy!! I can finally tell you all that


...---... [CARRIER NOT FOUND] ...---...

NickyOD

Amaru wrote:

I just want to know if anybody could suggest a reason for the difference.

There isn't one. You saw a rush of big hands and bad beats. So what? If you sat and watched the series of big hands that came up against eachother at the last IPT Suprtsat in Cork you'd realise how often this can happen. It is just normal variance. Online poker is not rigged. You haven't played anywhere near enough hands. I could go for ages sometimes in NL cash games and never see a pot of more than 50BBs.

Amaru

Davey Devil wrote:

Whole Post

Thank you. Thats a credible explanation, and i'll now drop this.

Iago

clarification required

OP definitions;
STT; Single Table Tournament
SNG/ Real Money: Cash Games

OP believes that although there is no rigging in STTs there is in real money games in order to increase the rake taken by the site so that they increase their profits from these games.

This is similar to an earlier question around whether or not the tournaments and cash games are rigged to give the advantage to regular or high stakes players as the sites will make more money out of them over an extended period of time.

Personally I think the sites are making more than enough money already without having to rig any pots at all, when you play at low level tournament or cash game level there are more than enough muppets willing to throw all their money in the pot with bottom pair or looking for runner runner hands. There's no need to rig the game for them to hit their hand, most of them will just think they were unlucky not to hit that time and will do the same again on the next hand.

Online poker isn't rigged, except against me. In over 80% of the MTTs I've played I've lost on a hand where I was favourite when the chips went in the pot*. This is fact, not speculation, therefore I believe that the online sites are out to get me specifically. I don't know why yet, but I'll continue my investigations!!

In the meantime I'm going to start playing on PPP from this week as maybe they'll be nicer to me

[size=-12]* The fact that I was out of position or had been caught bluffing or made calls I shouldn't have made, or left players with too much value not to call is completely irrelevant and doesn't in any way detract from the fact that the online sites are out to get me[/size]

DeVore

STT: Single Table Tournament.
SNG: Sit and Go (typically the same thing as an STT)

Ring Game, Cash game, "cash": real money game where you can come and go as you please. each hand is played for real money, depicted by chips but each has a "real world" value in and of itself.

Play Money: Online only phenonmenon where players play for fake money and win nothing in reality. Designed to help new players ease themselves in and learn the interface without losing their tanks.

DeV.

PPP-Pit Boss

@ Iago!

Phil_321

I have to say I have my doubts about PPP. I had played well this morning, finished in the money in 7 out of 9 stts. I had my share of good and bad luck but made a nice profit.

Then this evening I'm playing and I'm getting numerous consecutive bad beats knocking me out left right and centre - as if to balance out my earlier wins.

A-10 vs A-8 preflop, both all-in, opponent catches an 8 puts me out
Q-10 vs Q-5 on the flop, both all-in, opponent catches 5 on the turn puts me out
JJ vs 88 preflop, all-in, both opponent catches 8 puts me out.
I've AK preflop, flop AAQ, guy goes all in, I call him he's Q10 suited, catches 2 more suited to make flush.

There are more, but that's all I took down.

The odds on each of these has to be at least 4-1, rising to 10-1 for the Q5. To lose like this consecutively is highly unlikely.

I am definately not convinced by what I've seen. One of the guys who put me out even commented on his suspicions of the software. "The software on this site is very dubious" were his exact words.
How could it ever be uncovered anyway, all it would take is a few simple lines of code to achieve some balancing so that the crap players don't loose nearly as often as they should, and hence keep playing.

Davey Devil

A badbeat in poker, well I never. I suppose if these hands happened in a casino you'd want the dealer fired.

ONLINE POKER IS NOT RIGGED

Hectorjelly

Phil_321 wrote:

I am definately not convinced by what I've seen. One of the guys who put me out even commented on his suspicions of the software. "The software on this site is very dubious" were his exact words.
How could it ever be uncovered anyway, all it would take is a few simple lines of code to achieve some balancing so that the crap players don't loose nearly as often as they should, and hence keep playing.

oh god

Phil_321

Oh yeah, I can't take a bad beat. How are they even possible :rolleyes:

Of course, I can take a bad beat, after all most hands are about not more than 3-1 to win, a small margin.

What I can't take is at least 5 or 6 very bad beats consecutively. Work out the odds and it's ridiculous.
It's a great idea, after all if the fish regularly loose all their money, they stop playing. Why not balance the cards to increase their chances and keep them contributing to the rake. Wow, business engages in untraceable, underhand tactics to maximise profits! Who'd believe that?

Hectorjelly

Phil_321 wrote:

Oh yeah, I can't take a bad beat. How are they even possible :rolleyes:

Of course, I can take a bad beat, after all most hands are about not more than 3-1 to win, a small margin.

What I can't take is at least 5 or 6 very bad beats consecutively. Work out the odds and it's ridiculous.
It's a great idea, after all if the fish regularly loose all their money, they stop playing. Why not balance the cards to increase their chances and keep them contributing to the rake. Wow, business engages in untraceable, underhand tactics to maximise profits! Who'd believe that?

Please stop

padser

Just a thought, since online poker is obviosly rigged then all the people who post up about money that they have 'won' must be part of the system. After all, just a few simple lines of code and at regular intervals up pops someone gloating about what they won

Waylander

Phil I suggest you read Rory's post in the Wedensday at the Fitz thread. The Fitz must be rigged too!

ionapaul

In the €33 rebuy WSOP satellite on Stars last night I lost all my chips bar 1200 while on the final table at BB, on the bubble. Blinds were 2000 / 4000 ante 100. I tripled up with 96o in SB, then doubled and doubled once again the following two hands, knocking another short stack out. Online poker is rigged!

Lafortezza

Could everyone in this thread post their online poker usernames plz. ty.

Phil_321

Here's my math:
1/10 * 1/5 * 1/4 * 1/4 *1/3 = 1/2400

I'm not 100% about the last one (1/3) but I think that's approximately correct. I think there was a sixth, but I didn't take it down so I left it out of the equation.

I'll say it again, I've no problem with bad beats, **** happens. But I didn't get a one off bad beat to put me out yesterday, I got 5 or 6 very bad beats in a row. There's a big difference.

There was a 1/2400+ chance of me catching the consecutive bad beats that I caught yesterday.

I'm going to play it again today, and if I see the same crap happening again I'm off to another site.

Iago

Phil_321 wrote:

Here's my math:
1/10 * 1/5 * 1/4 * 1/4 *1/3 = 1/2400

I'm not 100% about the last one (1/3) but I think that's approximately correct. I think there was a sixth, but I didn't take it down so I left it out of the equation.

I'll say it again, I've no problem with bad beats, **** happens. But I didn't get a one off bad beat to put me out yesterday, I got 5 or 6 very bad beats in a row. There's a big difference.

There was a 1/2400+ chance of me catching the consecutive bad beats that I caught yesterday.

I'm going to play it again today, and if I see the same crap happening again I'm off to another site.

and it may not happen for another 5M hands, ok that's unlikely but it's as possible as it happening in the next 5 hands...that's what makes it random.

The sheer volume of hands dealt online mean that more often than not you're going to see random occurences. It's not rigged just bad luck

ocallagh

Phil_321 wrote:

Here's my math:
1/10 * 1/5 * 1/4 * 1/4 *1/3 = 1/2400

I'm not 100% about the last one (1/3) but I think that's approximately correct. I think there was a sixth, but I didn't take it down so I left it out of the equation.

I'll say it again, I've no problem with bad beats, **** happens. But I didn't get a one off bad beat to put me out yesterday, I got 5 or 6 very bad beats in a row. There's a big difference.

There was a 1/2400+ chance of me catching the consecutive bad beats that I caught yesterday.

I'm going to play it again today, and if I see the same crap happening again I'm off to another site.

Unless some sadistic coder somehow managed to bypass audit trails and dump some rogue code it is absolutely absurd to say that online poker is rigged.

These sites are hardly going to risk everything to increase profit margins by a few percent. Pacific Poker was valued at 300M when it sold out to Sporting Bet. 300M.. They'd have lost it all if their code was rigged- Online Poker is a HUGE industry and you can be sure that it is run by CEOs that know what they are up to. Risking 300M to increase profit margins by a few percent makes no business sense whatsoever.

2400/1.. nothing. a run of consecutive badbeats i had a few monthsback was well into the 100,000s/1. And this included live tournys. I'll post if u want the list. I recorded it because I was in such shock but it happened.

Phil_321

ocallagh wrote:

These sites are hardly going to risk everything to increase profit margins by a few percent. Pacific Poker was valued at 300M when it sold out to Sporting Bet. 300M.. They'd have lost it all if their code was rigged- Online Poker is a HUGE industry and you can be sure that it is run by CEOs that know what they are up to. Risking 300M to increase profit margins by a few percent makes no business sense whatsoever.

A few percent? Well in a multi million(billion?) dollar business a few percent is a lot of money. Don't tell me you think it's beyond the bounds of probability to suggest that a business might try to manipulate a situation to their benefit. Especially when it's almost impossible for them to be found out.

I'm just very suspicious after my results yesterday, I'm not saying it's definately rigged.

Amaru

I'd just like to remind everybody that my original post was not about online poker being fixed, it was specifically real money tables. It wasn't because i had lost any money playing or taken several bad beats, it was because i was shocked by the huge amounts of high hands coming out.

Strings of bad beats happen. They do. If you look at games like craps or roulette, the odds are stacked in the favour of the casino, so whenever anybody wins any money, the casino is effectively the victim of a "bad beat". Yet people have still made big money, somtimes 5 and 6 figures, playing games such as this, just because of the fact that sometimes the odds don't follow distributions. Even in a 50/50 situations, its not always going to be "one favourable outcome" followed by "one unfavourable". You could get a string of 10 unfavourables in a row. It can happen. Its unlikely, but it can happen.

Phil_321

I'm not bitter over some 50/50 situation, my consecutive bad beat odds for yesterday were 1/2400+.

henbane

Phil_321 wrote:

I'm not bitter over some 50/50 situation, my consecutive bad beat odds for yesterday were 1/2400+.

And now you're whining about it. Good for you!

Amaru

I never said you were in a 50/50 situation, i was just using that as an example for distributions. The odds in casinos are usually stacked much worse that 6/5, and people occasionally do still win.

Krusty_Clown

What I can't take is at least 5 or 6 very bad beats consecutively. Work out the odds and it's ridiculous.

AT Vs A8 - 71% Vs 29%
QT Vs Q5 - 71% Vs 29%
JJ Vs 88 - 80% Vs 20%

I'd hardly describe these as very bad beats.. Now the Champions League final, there's a bad beat..

I'm getting numerous consecutive bad beats knocking me out left right and centre...Q-10 vs Q-5 on the flop, both all-in...

Why were you going all-in with QT anyway? Or probably a more fundamental question: Why did you go all-in several times consecutively?

Phil_321

Krusty_Clown wrote:

AT Vs A8 - 71% Vs 29%
QT Vs Q5 - 71% Vs 29%
JJ Vs 88 - 80% Vs 20%

The flop was QJrag. I had QT against up against one of the blinds in an unraised pot. I wanted to take the pot there and then but I was 80% sure of taking the pot anyway if he called my all-in.

QT Vs Q5 - 88% Vs 12%, post flop

And I've just checked and the AA vs QT with the AQrag flop, where I was beaten with a backdoor flush was 96% vs 4%. So my bad beat odds were actually much larger than 1/2400.

Krusty_Clown wrote:

Why were you going all-in with QT anyway? Or probably a more fundamental question: Why did you go all-in several times consecutively?

I mean consecutively as in consecutive games, when I went all in or called an all in. Usually quite late in the game, ie 4 left.
When you've got the best hand late in the game what are you gonna do, get blinded away, bluffed out of it or take your pot? Every call/all-in I made was shown to be the right decision when we both threw up our cards.

Waylander

It is not really a bad beat if you are already behind when all the chips go in Phil, you are manipulating the figures here to make your situation look bleaker.

Iago

Phil_321 wrote:

The flop was QJ5. I had QT against up against one of the blinds in an unraised pot. I wanted to take the pot there and then but I was 80% sure of taking the pot anyway if he called my all-in.

QT Vs Q5 - 88% Vs 12%, post flop

I'm sure I'm reading this wrong, what did your opponent have here? Was he holding Q5? because if he was then you're all-in move wasn't the right move and you were behind?

I've probably misread your post though...

Phil_321

Sorry, you're right. I can't remember the 3rd card on the flop, it was some rag. He caught the 5 on the turn.

DeVore

My worst single bad beat ever was AA vs QQ vs QT (all in preflop pretty much).... I came third to lose both pots... THATS a bad beat.

Poker stars just celebrated their 2 billionth hand and 5th birthday (roughly).
There are easily 1 million players online at any given time between all the sites. Thats 1 million chances per half hour for a run of bad luck like yours. Lets make yours worse then it really was and say its 1:10,000 against it happening. Every half hour 100 people suffer your fate. Were you unlucky to be one of that one hundred? Yes.... Is it statistically likely to happen to SOMEONE, yes.

This is what mathematicians refer to as a Gamblers Fallacy (and more specific to this cae, the Inverse Gamblers Fallacy). Its linked to the Antropic Principle which you can find explained in Wikipedia.org too, but which deals with the chances of life arising on Earth.

The fact is that counter-intuitively, if people WERENT complaining about bad beats (and by extention, runs of bad beats) then I would consider that STRONGER proof of rigging then the reverse. If you roll two dice 500 times and they NEVER came up snake eyes, something is clearly VERY wrong, even though 1,1 is a 1:36 shot!

DeV.

Hitman Actual

Just got to read this thread now, and cant believe some of the s***e being spouted! Phil_123, how long are you playing poker? Not very long, I think.

The game is full of crazy probabilty, both online and live, and tbh a 2400/1 situation is tame. Everyone here has more than likely gone through the same beats, and will get worse runs in the future (It's happened to me playing live, but I didn't request to have any dealers sacked!).

Have you ever seen two players getting AA at the same time: 48,000/1. On top of that, someone once posted here about getting AA in two online games simultaneously, and flopping a set in both: about 4,000,000/1. A few weeks ago I was playing a draw poker game and someone was dealt a Royal Flush cold: 660,000/1.

The fact is, if you play long enough, you'll see everything. I'd vote that these 'online poker is rigged' threads be banned, but the conspiracy theorys always provide some great light entertainment.

padser

Phil i have to say i think there is a falel flaw in your stats that what happened is 1/2400. if you pick any selection of hands then the odds of them happening is going to miniscule.


also btw if you play 30 hands and hour then that 1/2400 then it happens statisically inside 80 hrs.

OilBeefHooked2

Amaru wrote:

Has anybody else any views on this? I play a lot of STTs, but recently i've ventured into SnG to see what the returns are like(this is on VC). The hands coming out are obscene! Its like the play money tables. In one hour sessions, i counted 18 flushes! Somebody told me before that they give good hands to drive up the pots, thereby they make money on the rake, and i'd be inclined to agree. Am i wrong? Is it just a coincidence(i've actually seen this numerous times, not a once off)? And is it just on VC?

oh yes of course they are all rigged :rolleyes: with the one clear objective in mind to take your rake and your money.

Especially yours, they know when you log on and a program kicks into action to deal YOU ****e marginal cards! :rolleyes:

I'm not being at all sarcastic!

Dont forget you and you only decide wheter( or how) you play the hand's your dealt !

Amaru

david-k wrote:

oh yes of course they are all rigged :rolleyes: with the one clear objective in mind to take your rake and your money.

Especially yours, they know when you log on and a program kicks into action to deal YOU ****e marginal cards! :rolleyes:

I'm not being at all sarcastic!

Dont forget you and you only decide wheter( or how) you play the hand's your dealt !

You know, i love when people don't read the whole of threads and then decide to make stupid statements based only on what they've read. So let me fill you in on what you missed in the rest of the thread:

1) I already said that i'd used this "rigging" to my advantage, using it to win money. This wasn't rigging accusation based on a bad beat.

2) My accusation wasn't about all online play, only real money, and only on VC.

3) There actually is a plausible reason for what i'm seeing, explained by DD, and its not to do with rigging. It has to do with how people play differently at low limits real money to low limit STTs

4) I accepted this explanation and moved on

Now in light of all this, do you feel like a dumbass yet?

Spiritus

Amaru wrote:

1) I already said that i'd used this "rigging" to my advantage, using it to win money. This wasn't rigging accusation based on a bad beat.

:eek:

You may find this of interest:

http://www.reptilianagenda.com/research/r110199k.shtml

Amaru

Spiritus wrote:

:eek:

You may find this of interest:

http://www.reptilianagenda.com/research/r110199k.shtml

You might find this headline of interest:

Link