You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!
Options
Posting too many hands, especially when they are beats.
Nice one Dave
Getting a bit tired of the constant posts from the same couple of players !
Getting a bit tired of the constant posts from the same couple of players !
Comments
Please get a grip people.
No you won't see as many of these bad beats live - 1) people play differently & 2) the number of hands you play will probably be far fewer than on line.
The better players on here don't moan about bad beats and they don't play with a different pack of cards. Instead of moaning get a grip, look at your own game and improve it - then this site might get back to the way it used to be and not a moaners forum.
Personal rant over
Steve
I think it was generally aimed at him
something that I saw in the chat box of one of my cash tables today said a very valid point.
these so called rigged river cards are infact just one villians bad card but another villians good one.
plus those that know poker will know that these chasers fish calling stations and maniacs are just the type of villians we all want.
if these villians started to fold their draws gutshots weak pairs and over cards. poker would get so boring.
Since setting up this thread has anything been done to stop the constant bad beat drivel we get on here?
Perhaps a two strikes and you are out policy.
2 posts about bad beats with no useful content (or insert any common whinge we get on here), 2 warnings then on the third time a weeks chat ban.
Your always so fast to criticise something, but never actually suggest your viable alternative.
Fat lot of use you would be in a life or death situation.
No dont do that!
What a silly idea
No, I dont agree with that one
What a stupid notion
etc etc
By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms.
In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data).
However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand.
I also played cash tables and heads up cash tables and had exactly the same high value dealt hole cards and zero bad beats. Almost as if a switch had been flicked.
I'm testing the data because I believe the algorithm they are using has a manual intervention capability or a skew to certain types of play/player.
I write algorithms for a living and I like to query the integrity of other algorithms. If a poker site like sky which is geared to maximum profit (7.5% and 10% rake which is actually very high comparatively) wants to make sure the algorithm contributes significantly to the profit them:
>> It must be close to random but it must favour the reckless play because this gets more money in the rake.
>> It must punish tight play and encourage loose play by restricting the hole card value to tight players thereby forcing them to be more aggressive with lower value cards.
>> It must have a high bad beat ratio because this encourages more inexperienced players to go all in with lesser cards thereby generating more rake, and kills good tight players because they don't contribute enough t
Does the sky poker algorithm do any of that? Not sure yet... If you were the boss of that poker site, and your salary was directly correlated to the profitability of the business - would you skew it? Probably not. Would anyone?
Here's a review off poker scout from January 2013 see if you can spot the similarities:
"I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site.
By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms.
In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data).
However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand.
It's almost like it's word for word the same......oh wait it is! Plagarise much do you?!
http://www.pokerscout.com/AllReviews.aspx?id=608
well I think you should, far prefer reading someone being honest and writing what they think than some pc person full of self importance saying " well that's poker"
Good luck with that.