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!

On line poker

edited January 2011 in Area 51
Right, this is not a rant because I have been dumped out of a tournie yet again.  Mind you after lasting only 5 minutes in tonights b/h it as stirred me into making this post.

I have found a flaw in the software used by all poker sites.

Do not take on a bigger stack than you, no matter what cards you are holding.  You see the software favors the larger stack.

It makes sence to have you out quickly and spending your money on another game.

I am not a bad poker player, sometimes I think I am better than I am, but we are all guilty of that.

I am exactly £3,225 up over the last twelve months on live games, but online I use a different tactic.  You see I have on more than one occasion folded premium hands to a larger stack because I know I will be rivered or outkicked.  In live poker you play your hand to it's ability, but you cannot online.

Why not use this to your advantage I hear you say?  I did and won a double stack last month and pocketed £1300.  But you are okay if a bigger stack does not take you on, you can only fold so many hands.

This is not poker, I am sure many of you can tell a tale of bad beats.  It happens more on line because you play more hands is the official line.  Let me tell you I have kept records on hand to bad beat ratio and something is not right.

I am sorry I am ranting but if I had not been knocked out I would be on tilt.  My hand tonight by the way was AA I had 1880 chips I raised to 300 and chip leader called me.  Flop was 7 10 3  I went all in to scare away all possibilities he called me with Q 10.  you guessed it 10 on the turn Q on the river.  I was beat by a flopped full house.  Take it from me this would not have happened if I had the greater stack.  Anyway back for another game, this time down the local pub.  Mick.

Comments

  • edited January 2011
    YOU ARE MENTAL
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    YOU ARE MENTAL
    Posted by scotty77
    Maybe, I am but 5 grand richer than you
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    In Response to Re: On line poker : Maybe, I am but 5 grand richer than you
    Posted by fosdyke
    If you are, it's got nothing to do with poker.

    I haven't read ur post yet, I save these kinda ones till the morning to help me laugh off the hangover.



  • edited January 2011

    Just rofl

    How can someone who distrusts online poker win £1,300 in a double stack.

    Maybe your just a poor player who ran well because you were the big stack.... But how does one become a big stack... er by running well....

    Lol at Area 51 being a hangover cure...



  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    Just rofl How can someone who distrusts online poker win £1,300 in a double stack. Maybe your just a poor player who ran well because you were the big stack.... But how does one become a big stack... er by running well.... Lol at Area 51 being a hangover cure...
    Posted by GREGHOGG
    Yes i used the system, that is what the post is about.

    ps, long live King Arry COYS
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    In Response to Re: On line poker : Yes i used the system, that is what the post is about. ps, long live King Arry COYS
    Posted by fosdyke
    So next time a smaller stack shoves into you in a tournie online, you're gonna call regardless of the cards you're holding?

    Didn't think so.

    "long live King Arry COYS" - This is the only sensible thing you've posted on this thread so far.
  • edited January 2011


    I totally agree with the OP. If it wasnt for the introduction of rebuys to give donks like me another chance, I would be long gone!
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    In Response to Re: On line poker : So next time a smaller stack shoves into you in a tournie online, you're gonna call regardless of the cards you're holding? Didn't think so. "long live King Arry COYS" - This is the only sensible thing you've posted on this thread so far.
    Posted by JingleMa
    Never said that, what I said was never take on a bigger stack, 4 out of 5 times you will lose.  This is a fact I have kept count.
  • edited January 2011
    SOMEONE MENTION BIG STACK

    Hand History #330984795 (21:35 17/01/2011)

    PlayerActionCardsAmountPotBalance
    millea06 Small blind   300.00 300.00 28367.50
    spornybol Big blind   600.00 900.00 5020.00
      Your hole cards
    • 10
    • Q
         
    BADBOY985 Fold        
    micawber Fold        
    Shafty91 Raise   1200.00 2100.00 10860.00
    yidette9 Fold        
    millea06 Raise   1500.00 3600.00 26867.50
    spornybol Call   1200.00 4800.00 3820.00
    Shafty91 All-in   10860.00 15660.00 0.00
    millea06 All-in   26867.50 42527.50 0.00
    spornybol All-in   3820.00 46347.50 0.00
    millea06 Unmatched bet   16607.50 29740.00 16607.50
    millea06 Show
    • A
    • A
         
    spornybol Show
    • 10
    • Q
         
    Shafty91 Show
    • A
    • K
         
    Flop
       
    • 10
    • 7
    • 4
         
    Turn
       
    • 10
         
    River
       
    • 2
         
    spornybol Win Three 10s 16860.00   16860.00
    millea06 Win Two Pairs, Aces and 10s 12880.00   29487.50
  • edited January 2011
    PlayerActionCardsAmountPotBalance
    GaryQQQ Small blind  1000.00 1000.00 67376.00
    small stack Big blind  2000.00 3000.00 29624.00
      Your hole cards
    • K
    • A
         
    GaryQQQ Raise  4000.00 7000.00 63376.00
    small stackAll-in  29624.00 36624.00 0.00
    GaryQQQ Call  26624.00 63248.00 36752.00
    GaryQQQ Show
    • K
    • A
       
    small stack Show
    • A
    • 9
       
    Flop
       
    • 5
    • Q
    • 4
         
    Turn
       
    • 10
         
    River
       
    • 7
         
    small stack Win Flush to the Ace 63248.00  63248.00
    Your flaw doesn't seem to apply when I play, this a HU hand from a tournament final table yesterday.

    If your theory was right then the early chip leader would win most tournaments, but I can assure you that's not the case, watch the lobby of any tournament, guys who get a big lead early on rarely end up being the winner.
  • edited January 2011

    Oh em Tony G !!!

    Was deffo worth the wait.

    Jinglema's point must be valid though, - if the big stack wins 4/5 times, you should be calling, or even better, re-shoving with any 2 cards against the smaller stacks.

    It would be stupid not to if you believe in your theory,
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to On line poker:
    Right, this is not a rant because I have been dumped out of a tournie yet again.  Mind you after lasting only 5 minutes in tonights b/h it as stirred me into making this post. I have found a flaw in the software used by all poker sites. Do not take on a bigger stack than you, no matter what cards you are holding.  You see the software favors the larger stack. It makes sence to have you out quickly and spending your money on another game. I am not a bad poker player, sometimes I think I am better than I am, but we are all guilty of that. I am exactly £3,225 up over the last twelve months on live games, but online I use a different tactic.  You see I have on more than one occasion folded premium hands to a larger stack because I know I will be rivered or outkicked.  In live poker you play your hand to it's ability, but you cannot online. Why not use this to your advantage I hear you say?  I did and won a double stack last month and pocketed £1300.  But you are okay if a bigger stack does not take you on, you can only fold so many hands. This is not poker, I am sure many of you can tell a tale of bad beats.  It happens more on line because you play more hands is the official line.  Let me tell you I have kept records on hand to bad beat ratio and something is not right. I am sorry I am ranting but if I had not been knocked out I would be on tilt.  My hand tonight by the way was AA I had 1880 chips I raised to 300 and chip leader called me.  Flop was 7 10 3  I went all in to scare away all possibilities he called me with Q 10.  you guessed it 10 on the turn Q on the river.  I was beat by a flopped full house.  Take it from me this would not have happened if I had the greater stack.  Anyway back for another game, this time down the local pub.  Mick.
    Posted by fosdyke
    3 points

    Its not really a premium hand if you are susceptible to being outkicked.

    Flopped FH? he had top pair on flop, so he thought he was good, then he has 6 outs against your pair so he's about 20% to hit, he outdraws you 1 in 5 times, this is such an occasion.

    This happens live as well, I won at Newcastle last week and twice outdrew a better hand with a 2 outer and once with a 1 outer.

    Dave


  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    In Response to On line poker : 3 points Its not really a premium hand if you are susceptible to being outkicked. Flopped FH? he had top pair on flop, so he thought he was good, then he has 5 outs against your pair so he's about 20% to hit, he outdraws you 1 in 5 times, this is such an occasion. This happens live as well, I won at Newcastle last week and twice outdrew a better hand with a 2 outer and once with a 1 outer. Dave
    Posted by SolarCarro
    fyp :-)
  • edited January 2011
    Alot of people share this point of view that you take your tournament life in your hands taking on a bigger stack.  People often use the same reasoning as the opening poster and I do agree that it has some merit.  Just to add another level to it; i used to play alot at "the biggest site in the world" and alot of players floated this theory.  It was then compounded by a statistical grid showing how long each sit and go lasts based upon fixed entrants.  They could diffinitively show that such and such tourny had a life expectancy between specific timed amounts.  This really would help project future incomes for the sites in question.  Knowing ahead of time how the average/projected number of tourneys would last.  No games deviated from this timeframe.  Then to furthar compound these concerns an update was introduced that removed the "tournament running for 00;00 time", not allowing players to keep track of the times anymore.  I have to admit it made me very skeptical
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    Alot of people share this point of view that you take your tournament life in your hands taking on a bigger stack.  People often use the same reasoning as the opening poster and I do agree that it has some merit.  Just to add another level to it; i used to play alot at "the biggest site in the world" and alot of players floated this theory.  It was then compounded by a statistical grid showing how long each sit and go lasts based upon fixed entrants.  They could diffinitively show that such and such tourny had a life expectancy between specific timed amounts.  This really would help project future incomes for the sites in question.  Knowing ahead of time how the average/projected number of tourneys would last.  No games deviated from this timeframe.  Then to furthar compound these concerns an update was introduced that removed the "tournament running for 00;00 time", not allowing players to keep track of the times anymore.  I have to admit it made me very skeptical
    Posted by AMYBR
    It is all about a site making money, it is common sense the more games the more money made, SIMPLES.
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    Alot of people share this point of view that you take your tournament life in your hands taking on a bigger stack.  People often use the same reasoning as the opening poster and I do agree that it has some merit.  Just to add another level to it; i used to play alot at "the biggest site in the world" and alot of players floated this theory.  It was then compounded by a statistical grid showing how long each sit and go lasts based upon fixed entrants.  They could diffinitively show that such and such tourny had a life expectancy between specific timed amounts.  This really would help project future incomes for the sites in question.  Knowing ahead of time how the average/projected number of tourneys would last.  No games deviated from this timeframe.  Then to furthar compound these concerns an update was introduced that removed the "tournament running for 00;00 time", not allowing players to keep track of the times anymore.  I have to admit it made me very skeptical
    Posted by AMYBR
    lol - single tale and multi table tournaments are all set up to last as long as the organisers intend them to last (within a range of times - not a specific length of time obviously)

    They make them last as long as they want them to last by how they construct the structure of the tournament or sit and go.

    If you did the same test on a sufficiently large sample size of live games you'd get a very similar result - are they rigging the live games as well?
  • edited January 2011
    Thats a huge over simplification not taking into account any of the subject matter that i mentioned
  • edited January 2011
    You cant really tell someone, instantly, that they are wrong, especially on the basis of one hand.
  • edited January 2011
    Nothing in the last two weeks has made me change my mind.  Sorry but quick turnover means more money for the site.

    I could quote loads of hands, but why bother?
  • edited January 2011

    you see more hands on line that what you do live which gives the impression that online is fixed you see about 5 hands 2 1 live lolz

  • edited January 2011
    Again this piece of propaganda..........

    The principle of this is appears sound but really take a look beyond the simple self assurance that it offers and you'll find that it simply isnt the case
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    you see more hands on line that what you do live which gives the impression that online is fixed you see about 5 hands 2 1 live lolz
    Posted by gaz4tez17


    The numbers shouldn't change the percentage. 

  • edited January 2011


     PM SENT ELSA .
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    you see more hands on line that what you do live which gives the impression that online is fixed you see about 5 hands 2 1 live lolz
    Posted by gaz4tez17

    went to casino last night and played about 150 hands...

    saw 1 flush 1 straight and a few trips.....

    got in watched 30 hands on a table on here saw ,a full house ,a quads,nut flush beaten by full house...,two sets of trips beaten by a flush,and a straight...

    guess it must just be because its quicker dealt...:)
  • edited January 2011
    In Response to Re: On line poker:
    In Response to Re: On line poker : went to casino last night and played about 150 hands... saw 1 flush 1 straight and a few trips..... got in watched 30 hands on a table on here saw ,a full house ,a quads,nut flush beaten by full house...,two sets of trips beaten by a flush,and a straight... guess it must just be because its quicker dealt...:)
    Posted by djblacke04
    Had to laugh last night .......... switched on master cash late on. Hole cards are dealt and I said to my missus which 3 players would be involved. One had 77 and the other two had small connectors, one suited. Some prefolp betting and before the flop, I said to my wife ''the guy with 77 will get a set on the flop and the other, with the un-suited connectors will win it with a straight on the river.

    Guess what happened?    I switched off the TV and went to bed grinning from ear to ear :o)

    Just a lucky guess I suppose.
Sign In or Register to comment.