All Categories› Poker› Poker Chat

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!

Downhill Spiral

135

Comments

  • SHANXTASHANXTA
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : Glory be. Eventually, people will work this out, but it's taking a while. Poker is NOT a game against the House. Poker is a game between the players, & the House does not have the slightest interest in which player wins.   Sky Poker is part of a very large & reputable organisation, who happen to be OCD about compliancy. The Company is doing very well - very well indeed. Traffic & revenues are all running at record Levels, & there is (are?, I'm unsure of the grammar there) miles of headroom to grow further.  Why on earth anyone would think Sky Poker need to mess with something that is clean, honest, & profitable, particularly on such flimsy evidence (think "Sample Size" please) is quite beyond my understanding. It also assumes that the Staff, & I, are stupid, & corrupt. We are neither.  
    Posted by Tikay10
    U may never call Orford stupid again! ;-)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : U may never call Orford stupid again! ;-)
    Posted by SHANXTA
    You got me there.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ParaPokerParaPoker
    edited December 2010
    This is for SHANXTA... how do poker sites combat sharks playing at low level tables?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : Fair comment Alan - but you have been round the poker block a few times, & you know how many beans make five. You cannot seriously think Sky Poker is anything except clean, as are the very vast majority of Online Poker Sites. I just don't believe you could possibly think that. And it does irritate when time & time again it is suggested that Sky Poker staff are part of a conspiracy to defraud - because that is what you are suggesting. So I'm sorry for the cheap jibes, but you'd rather face cheap jibes than be described as dishonest, which is what you are suggesting, & which I find grossly offensive.   
    Posted by Tikay10


    I haven't accused anyone of anything. I have said that I have been observing what I believe to be anomalies for some time now. Others have also said they are seeing things which don't seem right. I said that I understand your stance on this subject, and I do. That wasn't a veiled suggestion that you are somehow implicated in some major conspiracy, it's simply a knowledge of all the past replies you have made on this and similar threads. 

    I haven't suggested that Sky Poker is anything but clean. What I have said is that I don't like what I am seeing at the tables. and in the full knowledge that it would be jumped upon. Nevertheless I still see it happening. 

    Your comments are a complete over-reaction to my post, and it seems you are attempting to personalise this subject, for what reason I don't know. 

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MereNoviceMereNovice
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : I haven't accused anyone of anything. I have said that I have been observing what I believe to be anomalies for some time now. Others have also said they are seeing things which don't seem right. I said that I understand your stance on this subject, and I do. That wasn't a veiled suggestion that you are somehow implicated in some major conspiracy, it's simply a knowledge of all the past replies you have made on this and similar threads.  I haven't suggested that Sky Poker is anything but clean. What I have said is that I don't like what I am seeing at the tables. and in the full knowledge that it would be jumped upon. Nevertheless I still see it happening.  Your comments are a complete over-reaction to my post, and it seems you are attempting to personalise this subject, for what reason I don't know. 
    Posted by elsadog
    Can you not see that those two statements are completely contradictory???
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010

    Alan,

    If you think there are "anomolies" in the software, rather than make Forum Posts about them, or at the very least, in addition to them, may I suggest you report them to the Independent Regulator.

    It's amazing that players can make these offensive suggestions, without a shred of admissable evidence, day after day, but as soon as someone stands up to them, they go on the defensive. 

    If you think there are anomolies, you really should take your case to the Independent Regulator. 

    If I think a supplier, say (hypothetically) Sainsbury's, or Tesco, is diddling me, I report them, every time to the appropriate authority. I see it as my responsibility & duty to my fellow customers.

    I bet there have been 1,000 Posts on this Forum suggesting "anomolies" in the software. The address & a Link to the Independent Regulator is at the foot of every Forum Page. 

    I wonder what the over/under is on how many players have actually reported these anomolies to the Regulator?  I would think the line would be set at about 4-5. I'm a seller.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SHANXTASHANXTA
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    This is for SHANXTA... how do poker sites combat sharks playing at low level tables?
    Posted by ParaPoker
    your question makes no sense

    'sharks' / good players, are perfectly entitled to play at whatever level they wish
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : Glory be. Eventually, people will work this out, but it's taking a while. Poker is NOT a game against the House. Poker is a game between the players, & the House does not have the slightest interest in which player wins.   Sky Poker is part of a very large & reputable organisation, who happen to be OCD about compliancy. The Company is doing very well - very well indeed. Traffic & revenues are all running at record Levels, & there is (are?, I'm unsure of the grammar there) miles of headroom to grow further.  Why on earth anyone would think Sky Poker need to mess with something that is clean, honest, & profitable, particularly on such flimsy evidence (think "Sample Size" please) is quite beyond my understanding. It also assumes that the Staff, & I, are stupid, & corrupt. We are neither.  
    Posted by Tikay10

    This is  flawed argument and often used. Poker isn't a game against the house as you rightly say and so on the surface it appears that there is no good reason for any site to have anything other than a completely random deal. However the house does have an interest in who is winning and who is losing. 

    Poker sites generate their revenue from a number of sources but the largest contributor is the rake. The volume of rake is entirely dependent upon the number of active players on site and so the more players, the more rake, and therefore the more profit generated. All money deposited into a site is split between the rake and the winning players. The money after rake will, over time, find it's way to a very small percentage of players. The large majority of players will lose money both in the short and long term and a large portion of these players will leave the site or go bust. This leaves the site with the ongoing problem of attracting more players from an ever diminishing pool. 

    In a perfect  (made for poker sites) world, the skill differences between the players would be much smaller than it is in the real world. In this ideal world there would be little to choose between the skills of the players and so the vast majority wouldn't go bust as quickly, they would play more games and their deposited monies would go much further. As a consequence of this the rake (and profits) would increase dramatically and the site numbers would be far easier to maintain or increase ............ but that's in a fantasy poker site world, not the real world. 

    I don't suggest this happens by default, but the argument is certainly flawed.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : Can you not see that those two statements are completely contradictory???
    Posted by MereNovice


    No they are not!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    Alan, If you think there are "anomolies" in the software, rather than make Forum Posts about them, or at the very least, in addition to them, may I suggest you report them to the Independent Regulator. It's amazing that players can make these offensive suggestions, without a shred of admissable evidence, day after day, but as soon as someone stands up to them, they go on the defensive.  If you think there are anomolies, you really should take your case to the Independent Regulator.  If I think a supplier, say (hypothetically) Sainsbury's, or Tesco, is diddling me, I report them, every time to the appropriate authority. I see it as my responsibility & duty to my fellow customers. I bet there have been 1,000 Posts on this Forum suggesting "anomolies" in the software. The address & a Link to the Independent Regulator is at the foot of every Forum Page.  I wonder what the over/under is on how many players have actually reported these anomolies to the Regulator?  I would think the line would be set at about 4-5. I'm a seller.
    Posted by Tikay10


    That made me chuckle


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MereNoviceMereNovice
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : No they are not!
    Posted by elsadog

    You're going to have to explain that one to me!

    You're convinced that Sky is clean yet you don't like what you're seeing at the tables?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010

    Alan,

    The argument is only flawed if you make the assumption that the Site is operated dishonestly. It is not.

    Have you reported your suspicions to the Independent Regulator? If not, why not?  
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • pryce6pryce6
    edited December 2010
    The losers complain, the winners don't.

    I am a winner.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010

    Enjoy this debate, lads, because my New Years Resolution will be not to waste my time on these bizarre threads.

    And please remember, if you think anything is amiss, just take your evidence to the Independent Regulator.

    Have ANY of you ever done that? 

     
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    The losers complain, the winners don't. I am a winner.
    Posted by pryce6

    Me too!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • scotty77scotty77
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : You're going to have to explain that one to me! You're convinced that Sky is clean yet you don't like what you're seeing at the tables?
    Posted by MereNovice
    my take on that sentence was that Alan thinks that the site is run honestly, however the RnG is ever so slighlty flawed compared to other sites.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    The losers complain, the winners don't. I am a winner.
    Posted by pryce6
    Nail, head.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GaryQQQGaryQQQ
    edited December 2010
    All these silly conspiracy theories are easily explained by two simple things; variance and selective memory (which is something we all have). I'd say the chances of Sky having a crooked RNG is about as likely as the existence of The Loch Ness monster.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : my take on that sentence was that Alan thinks that the site is run honestly, however the RnG is ever so slighlty flawed compared to other sites.
    Posted by scotty77
    Ryan,

    The RNG cannot be "slightly flawed" any more than someone can be slightly pregnant, or slightly dead.

    In any event, the sample sizes being quoted are laughable - as you well know.      
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : You're going to have to explain that one to me! You're convinced that Sky is clean yet you don't like what you're seeing at the tables?
    Posted by MereNovice

    OK if I must.

    The two separate statements were in reply to Tikay's post where he said I was suggesting that Sky, Himself, his dog, and everyone else was corrupt. My first statement answered that by saying I didn't suggest or claim that Sky etc. is corrupt. This is true because I didn't and never have. 

    The second statement was that I didn't like what I was seeing at the tables and I don't.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MereNoviceMereNovice
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : my take on that sentence was that Alan thinks that the site is run honestly, however the RnG is ever so slighlty flawed compared to other sites.
    Posted by scotty77
    He would have to think that there is no RNG at all for his to occur.
    The site would certainly have to be crooked to manufacture hands so that certain people (or types of hands or stack sizes or different styles of play) regularly won - this is not something that a "flawed" RNG would produce.

    Either the site is "clean" (and people stop posting ridiculous claims) or those that administer it are corrupt and/or incompetent (and people should report the site as suggested by Tikay) - there seems to be no other options to me.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • phil12ukphil12uk
    edited December 2010
    Happy new year everyone!! :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MereNoviceMereNovice
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : OK if I must. The two separate statements were in reply to Tikay's post where he said I was suggesting that Sky, Himself, his dog, and everyone else was corrupt. My first statement answered that by saying I didn't suggest or claim that Sky etc. is corrupt. This is true because I didn't and never have.  The second statement was that I didn't like what I was seeing at the tables and I don't.
    Posted by elsadog
    To be clear, you think that someone is corrupt, though?

    For the situations that you have described to occur, I'm sure that you can see that these would never arise just from a "flawed" RNG. Your action of limping or raising on the button would not affect the output from an already determined random number and randomly selected deck, do you not agree?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    Happy new year everyone!! :)
    Posted by phil12uk

    Happy New Year Phil 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Wacko90Wacko90
    edited December 2010
    This arguement is pointless. Sky is obviously not rigged.

    if you think it is, go report it to the appropriate authorities who will investigate....and prove you all wrong :)


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • chew07chew07
    edited December 2010
    Can i just add my 2 pence worth on this subject , i have sat here and read every post on this thread (sad i know) can i just ask all the people who think that Sky Poker is bent in anyway shape or form why are you still playing on this site.
           If i thought that Sky Poker was bent i know for a fact that there is no-way i would carry on playing here, every single one of us who plays poker it dosent matter at what level gets bad beats, and the simple truth is if we cant take those beats without blaming something then i think it is time to find something else to do for a hobby.
          Because thats what it is for 99% of us a hobby it is not life or death its a game we play.
          Well ive had my 2 pence worth so ill just say Good luck at the tables everyone.
                                             Regards   Mick.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tikay10Tikay10
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    Happy new year everyone!! :)
    Posted by phil12uk
    Back at you, Phil!

    OK, I gotta go. There's a garage round the corner where I buy my petrol, & they sell me "short" gallons every time. I still go there, though, no point reporting it is there?

    Hope to see you on the MasterCash Tables tonight - I believe we are covering all Levels tonight.*

    * Yes, I know it's Wednesday, but we have a Live Masterrcash Show tonight, Orford in charge, God help us.
     
     
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : To be clear, you think that someone is corrupt, though? For the situations that you have described to occur, I'm sure that you can see that these would never arise just from a "flawed" RNG. Your action of limping or raising on the button would not affect the output from an already determined random number and randomly selected deck, do you not agree?
    Posted by MereNovice


    I said that Wow! Show me where please.

    I said that too, Wow! Show me where please.

    Dunno you're the expert


    I have merely (no pun intended) said that I don't like what I have been observing at the tables. You guys got all defensive and tried putting words in my mouth.








    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MereNoviceMereNovice
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral : I said that Wow! Show me where please. I said that too, Wow! Show me where please. Dunno you're the expert I have merely (no pun intended) said that I don't like what I have been observing at the tables. You guys got all defensive and tried putting words in my mouth.
    Posted by elsadog
    You said "I played it that way purposely. I said the OP would hit because I had intentionally flat called."

    How do you rationalize this statement if you do not believe that the site is corrupt?

    It has been clearly stated by Sky Poker that the cards are determined by a RNG that selects the deck before any action at the table is made. You are claiming that the actions were affected because you flat called.

    Can you reconcile these apparent contradictions?


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ybyb
    edited December 2010
    In Response to Re: Downhill Spiral:
    This is an argument that can't be won.  I wasn't going to get involved, I really wasn't, but having just played and forecast my own demise in the Open, to the very card - it was a bet with some friends who are here watching the game. I have to say that playing any tournament on here is a bit like plaiting sawdust - difficult in the extreme.  The argument over site integrity is pointless simply because it can't be proven, would never be admitted, and is after all ridiculous to think that anything could be amiss with the randomness of the cards. Unfortunately things happen in poker that cast doubts in peoples minds and lead to all kinds of rash statements regarding the legitimacy of the site. As humans we all have a tendency to recognise patterns (it's a basic function of the ''fight/flight'' part of our brain) and so we perceive things which happen repetitively as being non-random. This is of course incorrect, things will repeat occasionally, if they didn't it wouldn't be random. We also have selective memory and remember the highs and lows and the vast majority in the middle is forgotten.  All this leads to a sense of the outcome being somehow manipulated but with a clear mind these things can be recognised for what they really are. However, when ''these things'' happen with such regularity, it becomes very difficult to rationalise what is happening. I have been observing play recently and it is uncanny how many times the underdog wins the hand. I have no statistics to show this, just a few years experience of playing poker that are telling me that all is not as it should be. A lot of players seem to be either seeing or suffering from this anomaly but most will not say so publicly because they will be pounced upon.  Explaining what appears to be anomalous is very difficult to put into words, as I said earlier it can't be proven but that does not stop it being perceived. Most players on here know I'm not a losing player, in fact I have a healthy profit for 2010, and so this isn't a rant or a ''lets blame the software'' piece of trolling. I love Sky poker, I love the community and joining here 18 months ago is the best  move I've made in my poker history. So I won't be leaving but I won't be playing much either for the foreseeable future simply because I don't like what I'm seeing and encountering at the tables.  Finally, the exit hand from the Open. Well I'm sat with some friends who have turned up out of the blue. I mentioned that I had a game to play but that it wouldn't take long. So a few of us went into the dining room and we chatted as I played. I made a little progress initially and then I'm on the button. I get pocket 5's. I said I'm going to limp with this and just watch what happens. I limp, SB folds and BB calls. Flop comes 44x and I said to those watching ''he has a 4 and I'm going out of the tourney here. Sure enough he had the 4 .......... now what a coincidence, but then I'm probably just seeing those patterns again. 
    Posted by elsadog
    Tbf when you say things like this it seems as if you are inferring that sky is somehow less random than other sites, and for this to be true obviously someone working for sky must be corrupt.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.