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.
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.
Comments
: 1. lol - You don't like money? 2. Bigger lol. Its the nuts? 3. Maximise profits, minimize losses? another lol. 4. lol, nit, AK is a massive hand in 6 or 9 max games. 5. You wont 6. It does. Set mining is profitable, but u can't sit at a table and only play when u have a set unless you are playing against absolute morons who are blind and cant understand what you are doing.
Posted by DOHHHHHHH
Yes you are right on all counts.
I'm not advocating this style because i think it's the answer to becoming a poker hot shot. I am advocating it because it's super defensive against variance for beginners at low levels. I am not a gambler by nature and also not that materialistic at all. I mainly like poker because it's a strategy game. I used to play chess
So i ended up playing like this because i'm not mr. lucky, thought some sites were weird ( NOT SKY ! ) and it gave me 800% roi. Not great but beats losing i guess .
Yeah i got rolled to go up stakes and all that stuff but can't be bothered to play yabadabadoo head game flips with an ever increasing army of 'ambitious' Russian, Scandinavian or wherefknever teenagers
I'm too old to take the game or myself that seriously
In saying that i'm NOT criticising anybody that does. Yeah i'm cynical but i'm not a meanie
You like to try to help people and so do i. We just have different approaches.
Is that cool man ? We both know that some people are luckier than others. We also both know that all sites are not he same even tho thay are ALL bone fide random. Of course ;P
For me if some beginners can start by defending and building their roll, then they will have the opportunity to learn about the game on the way. Then it's up to them
I don't expect you to agree or approve but you may understand that beginners, in particular, are extremely vulnerable to variance
Not everyone is as smart as you and nor would you want them to be, right ?.
It's all bollo x ultimately. Yeah there's money but it's just a game of cards.
I did actually anticipate a greater level of hostility. Maybe some of what i say strikes a chord in some people ?
For instance say on a 6 player table and when all players have low cards and then usually small blind just calls big blind. No one had A or KQ KJ to raise, so we will always see a flop in these instances and odds are higher that we see Ace and top cards on these flops, as no A or K dealt yet.
Now next hand if someone has AK or AA they will raise or reraise and more likely everyone folds especially late on in tournment games(even A6 K 10 folds) and we dont see a flop.In these flops that we dont see the odds were in favour of the low cards coming on flop.
That is why we see more ACES than any other in a Flop.
I will say I've had more one outers hit me on sky in the last 2 months than I've had on FT in two years, but as I've only been testing sky out for that time I'm not making any judgement on that one thing. I will say I'm not that convinced that sky's RNG is very good. Of course I can't prove it without something like PT3/HEM, but I'd certainly be interested to test if suited flops and paired boards are happeing more than I'd statistically expect them to appear, as even visually they are far more freqent than I've seen on say FT or PS. Again take that with a pinch of salt as you need something like 50,000-100,000 hands to really account for variance, and no way can memory alone do that. Still I would be interested to see the results if ever they do allow the use of tracking software with their forthcoming DL software on Sky.
Does this mean I think Sky is rigged, or other online sites. HELLLLLLL NOOOO!!!. As someone else said in a post above there was the UB scandal, but despite what the poster said that was NOT rigged site, but some individuals abusing their postions to cheat. There is really no reason for poker sites to rig online poker, as they make MILLIONS anyway and so why risk it for the sake of making a little more by rigging it. They gain NOTHING by rigging the sites for action, as action will natually happen, and they have ZERO way of knowing if it would happen anyway as they can't tell how the players would choose to play thier hole cards. I mean seriously look at Sky's top of the pots each week, and on a lot of them pick which two hands you think are going to clash for massive pots. On some of them you'd be scratching your head to work out how any of the hands could end up in massive pots vs each other. So it would be damn hard to rig the action when you can't tell what players will do with their hole cards, and needless in any case.
As for bad beats.... YOu think it happens more or the beats are sicker then I can only assume you have never ever played live. Seriously? If you haven't yourself, just watch poker after dark or the poker millions on sky sports (on currently late nights) and you'll see just as many bad beats, and some damn sick ones at times too. The fact is we as humans tend to remember bad things more often than the good ones. It's easy to remember the times you got sucked out on, but how often do you bother to remember all the times the hand held up just fine.
TheQUOTE]I will say I've had more one outers hit me on sky in the last 2 months than I've had on FT in two years, etc
The UB thing is of a different nature.
IMPO i spent about 350k hands str8 on Cake and came to Sky to check it out. I remember after a few hours my gf came home and said "what's it like ? " and I replied "this is like playing live, look at these flops, look what they play, this is weird, 2 pr wins lol ". No endlessly paired flops , flush hell boards and overly strong holdings.
There are different types of random online. This, obviously, sounds paradoxical. You can use your common sense.
Otherwise play a trillion hands, MAYBE PS is just going thru an inevitable phase of seemingly unlikely randomness like Cake and Sky is currently in a phase of more seemingly apparent randomness like live, HUH?
We need to shave this enquiry down.
All sites are random ? yes
They all play the same ? Well not in my experience.
So ?
This does't necessarily have anything to do with bad beats, but it can.
Computer programmers and or mathematicians help please ? I believe this was the thrust of the original enquiry. Where is that cat now ?
I am currently watching Poker Millions and just heard Jesse May say, " the average winning holding in he is a pair ". This is live. It also maybe wrong. If it were correct would you recommend all in's with top pair good kicker online ?
I use pokertracker 3 on Fulltilt or Pokerstars and while you do get some whine that tracking software is almost a cheat I actually use it a lot myself to look at my own game to see where I have the most leaks (all have them at times), and also some what at times to see just how the site is dealing and if I'm seeing the sort of things that should be happening over long term play. It was actually people using tracking software and tracking sites that were able to prove those that were cheating on UB.
Why do I mention all that? Well, it's the only real way to tell if a site is dealing to what you would statistically expect to see over a large sample of hands. Certainly people that come into threads like this and post random hands to suggest it means anything are deluding themselves, as it doesn't mean anything and proves nothing. I'm sure at some point Sky will catch up with other sites, but right now they are a small site. Think if they wanted to they could have more players if they really wanted to, as they do offer the TV aspect, but the things they lack over the other sites would need improving. I hope they do, but maybe they like only having a fairly small player population.
Also if it was FIXED who would be able to prove it?
How exactly?
like wise if it was not how would you prove that?
if you look at the AGC it says something about 92-96% range of perfomance under guidelines......that would also follow that 4% of the time it can do what ever it wants.....
i think people do have bad runs.....but it is strange that you can have so much bad luck at 'all in' times...when your bankroll or tournement depends on it.....
the common arguement seems to be why?
well ill tell you why,because the best players would take all the money off the weaker players....and the weaker players are the ones who credit their accounts more often.....i am not saying Poker sites would fix the game for their benefit,just to help out the weaker players....
Felt a bit sorry for Theo, to run into 3 fullhouses in his 3 hands that knocked him out. Fullhouse was the hand of choice it seemed in that heat. lol
djblacke04 Acutually on that AA vs AK vs AK Huck Seed with one of the AK's folded preflop after there was a 3bet from Gus with AA and 4 bet from Joe Beevers. The odd that you should say it but the hand was won with a flush with 4 hearts on the board. AA held up though as he had the ace of hearts and the other had the king high flush.
You should also not DJ that one of the hands gus had last night was Gus with KJ vs AA for Jorgensen. Preflop Gus raised, was reraised by Jorgensen, which he flatted. Flop came down J25 and Jorgensen lead out with a Cbet, which Gus min reraised. Jorgensen then went all in over the top of him. Gus didn't like the spot but with the pot odds he was getting he made the "crying call". Turn was a King and river was a Jack giving Gus the boat and sending Jorgensen out.
In another hand Gus had like 67s and he donk betted a flop of 10J7 against Adeniya's KQ. Adeniya then reraised and Gus called. Turn was a Queen and Gus checked, and so did Adeniya hoping that Gus would bluff at it again on the river I guess... And of course the river was... another 7.
Why do I mention these? Cus all you ever here is people saying "OMG I got badbeats, this so does not happen live that all these ******* river card wins happen." etc. Fact is they do, and just as often. Do those pro's leap up off their seat and jump on the dealer screaming they are fixing the deals? No, they shake the hand of the winner and leave the building.
are you forgetting that the poker you see on tv is edited and you only see maybe 10% of the game ... like showing the bad beats and the big bluffs ..what about all the rest of the play ...very narrow view to live poker what you see on tv