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!
WTF
BAD BEATS SET UPS RUNNER RUNNER NOW I KNOW ABOUT VARIANCE IVE BEEN PLAYING 8 YRS AN BEEN PLAYING ON SKY SINCE THE START BUT THIS IS GETTING STUPID THE PROBARBILTY FACTORS ON SOME OF THESE ARE CRAZY YET IVE SEEN SOME CRAZY STUFF NOT ONLY MY HANDS OTHER PLAYERS YES IVE BEEN ON THE WINNING SIDE AS WELL AS THE LOSING SIDE (MOSTLY) AND HAVE BEEN THROUGH MANY BAD SPELLS BUT IVE NEVER SEEN THIS CONSISTANCY ON SKY WHERE THE MONEY IN INEVITABLY GOING IN THERE SOMEHOW ,ONLY TO SEE SOMETHING CRAZY ...................PARANOIA IS SETTING IN BIG TIME ..........CONSPIRICY THEORYS AND ALL THAT .............UDIRTYRAT
Comments
The organisation that provides the rubber stamp for licence has no ongoing involvement in checking the veracity of software performance and furthermore it removes itself, by way of a disclaimer, from any future movement away from their original findings (whatever they may be). This basically means that the software running the RNG is not under any scrutiny whatsoever and its performance was only checked within original parameters (also open to misrepresentation of expected probability) to obtain a licence to operate. Is this beginning to smell fishy?
The solution is a robust body scrutinising and regulating or an independent assessment of software veracity. Chance of it happening- ZERO. Sky want to make money and they are a small fish in a big online pond and cant afford to run honest or the best and most accurate RNG software because they would lose custom. Thats why the large percentage of MTT's are bounty hunters, to encourage gambling and paper over the cracks in their software products.
@sky poker; happy for your proof to any of this being incorrect!!??
I have 1 question
are you referring to the same type of hands like what most others seem to put in the BBV?
if you are then what difference does the pot size make when sky has already got it's money from the entry fee of them MTT.
all them chips do that are in the pot during hands is go to whoever wins that hand sky poker doesn't get anything from it at all their money is from the entry fee simple as that.
if however it is cash tables well then most times you must be simply not holding a chip stack that is 100 BB or your just not charging them big simply make notes on them that they chase runner runner then if you see a heart on the turn and river which created that flush well you will know he could well hold the flush.
The evidence as it stands is largely anecdotal because full evidence cannot be gained but I think its rubbish to suggest that a large amount of complainants are only bitter, or worse, stupid! I witness crazy levels of variance on this site at every table seemingly and in every tournament, and as far as I am concerned its got to be deliberate and a safeguard/promoter that maintains the greatest possible profit for the poker site.
If the person calling your A's and others with 7-2, 10-6, etc, doesnt win enough of the time he's going to leave the site and i seem to suffer those types of beats from players that seem to have no regard for poker probability or statistical analysis whatsover? In the end you cant put it down to running bad when you are losing with consistency with the best hand as well as watching others suffering the same fate.
I for one agree with you udirtyrat.
First hand I was nearly 93% fav, hand 2 I was 81% fav, hand 3 I was 87% fav and last hand 72% (split 5%). Sat night was not a good night for me lol
my point - you couldn't really hope to get your money in on better spots than these but the probability that I win all 4 of these hands is only 47%. It's just variance!
You limping too much DAVEYZZ, playing out of position, not knowing when to fold, will not lay your kings down on a flop wetter than a fishes wet bits ?
There is no need to create "action hands" they happen all by themselves in poker - if it didn't it wouldn't make very good television!!
WRONG !!! Poker room is like small eco system (fishes/sharks thing), Poker rooms dont want money to leave this eco system, so the best way of doing it - make sure that money keep flowing between players (pay pay pay your rake). In other words they don't like if you win too much, because that means, that you will start cashing out . Second thing - if bad player is loosing all the time, he's not gona play and not make any deposits(why, if he can't win ?). So poker rooms try to keep balance - helping bad players to win some money, which they can loose later on a same room . Money flow from player to player makes sure that players will not stop playing and paying rake. Of course if you good and have a good BM - you can still be up after all those bad beats
1. Any positive increase in premium hand production would naturally force more action at the tables which would increase rake and further entries for rake away from cash tables.
2. Any positive increase in premium hand production would also lead to an increase in heads up clashes and all-in scenario's, again increasing rake and tournament entries.
3. Any inaccurate variance from expected probability of a positive nature will increase a whole range of scenario's on a repeated and regular basis; 1 and 2 outer river beats, runner runners, "as posted- A's v three suited club hands that all flopped a flush and A's came last of 4 all in", etc, this could easily include what might be called underdog protection but it will always mean that expected outcomes are skewed.
4. The agent responsible for testing skypoker software, so it could obtain a licence, states that the initial testing fell within allowable parameters- what does that mean? It performs within 5% of expected probability tolerance, 1%, 0.5%, 0.1%? Does it mean it falls within parameters with positive fluctuation, negative fluctuation or both?
5. The same agent, after testing software in a limited manner relevant to licence attainment, goes on to state a disclaimer that any future variance away from their findings and test results is not their responsibility and they accept no liability for such. What could that possibly mean.
The point is those engineering software can set it up in any way they choose to any directive given. They can set it up to influence all of the above and it makes absolute business sense to not invest heavily in the very best software if you are only a small time operator in a big market, small fish in a big poker pond is what SKY is. If sky lose players (which they do and have done) because they lose in regulation or through poor performance the site couldnt cope because they have little else to offer or fall back on, unlike the big players who dont have the same worries because they monopolise the market and therefore try to get the software as close to perfect as possible to attract all the best players. They do that by investing more money in the RNG product which only goes to prove standards of expectation are different.
I could go on but will end with a challenge for SKYPOKER; allow independent testing of your software performance historically and currently and if you do i'll do 'all' the spadework to get the people to do it who will take on the challenge without charge.
1) Grumpy - who plays for fun, doesn't really care - or know - about good hands/big draws, etc, so he usually plays any two cards, and will sometimes suck out on opponents, as will forever be the case.
2) Happy - who is a semi-professional player and knows all the maths there is to know in poker. He usually gets it in good, and wins most of the time.
3) Sneezy - who doesn't have much money and is a nit, so only plays the tightest of hand ranges. If he's in the pot, you can be assured he holds a monster.
4) Bashful - he is wealthy and enters almost every pot because he can, and he likes the action. He likes to bet when he has nothing, and doesn't care if he is called.
5) Doc - he is a beginner and is just learning from watching what others do on the table. He occasionally mimics someone else to see where he feels comfortable.
6) Sleepy - he is a solid player, but not quite at the level of Happy, the semi-professional. He can turn a good bluff and knows most of the right spots. He tries to take advantage of the average players at the table.
So... what cards do they each hold, and what will the flop be? Now, do you see the problems in your theory?
I guess that makes you Dopey, right?
Online poker rooms are not the same as 'poker rooms' with decks of cards and dealers. Neither are they the same as each other. Before skill, experience or any other factor is employed by the consumer the quality of the product is questionable. For example the RNG product at P-stars is far superior to the product here and it is still imperfect to whatever small degree because the challenge of computer based RNG technology is not a walk in the park.
Beyond that everything is relative and you should be right up to a point but whilst not the best player in the world this is the only site I cannot make a profit or hold my own on and that to me doesnt add up and especially so when i can do it on P-stars when high rolling MTT'S against the best players around as well as on the best RNG product available. Just cant take the hours anymore or I wouldnt have come back to this hole in the first place.
I first started here because 25 years ago i began playing local casinos with a friend who'd joined sky. I would describe him as a semi-pro (family man but earned around 2-3k a month, also won the main event here and generally a strong player) and he stopped playing a few years ago claiming something had changed in the software. He's not the kind of person to beef about his losses but would, like you, talk up or down the standard of players. For him to state that and leave the site has more credibility to me than anything said about how it might be affected by personal standards of play.
My guess would be that they're all good at short stacked poker.