All Categories› Poker› Area 51

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!

have to agree with alot of you on here

ckdckd
edited May 2011 in Area 51

site has changed alot

seems like it is being set up for action hands and seem to be coming alot more bad play winning than there should be.... maybe time to move on i think as it is abit to silly now

i def see what your saying rover mate

seems to be alot more holds up other places

im sure i will get the sky fans telling me im wrong but to be fair if alot can see it then maybe it aint so wrong

anyway gl at the tables all wherever you play

but for now its goodnight from me and goodnight
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«13

Comments

  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011

    Sighhhhh people only see what happens on their tables. 

    So obviously there will be freak happenings, and runs of unlikely hands. 

    All random sequences have patterns within them, you're probably just seeing a pattern of unlikely happenings.



    -------------------------------------------------------------------------


    And the ratio of people that "see it" to people who don't "see it" is like 1/25,000.

    Normally that "1" is a proven losing player with a goldfish bowl on skope too.


    Gl anyway ckd! 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    Sighhhhh people only see what happens on their tables.  So obviously there will be freak happenings, and runs of unlikely hands.  All random sequences have patterns within them, you're probably just seeing a pattern of unlikely happenings. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- And the ratio of people that "see it" to people who don't "see it" is like 1/25,000. Normally that "1" is a proven losing player with a goldfish bowl on skope too. Gl anyway ckd! 
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    LOL - would that be a 1 in 25,000 ratio of the 200,000 active players - LOL

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ckdckd
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    Sighhhhh people only see what happens on their tables.  So obviously there will be freak happenings, and runs of unlikely hands.  All random sequences have patterns within them, you're probably just seeing a pattern of unlikely happenings. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- And the ratio of people that "see it" to people who don't "see it" is like 1/25,000. Normally that "1" is a proven losing player with a goldfish bowl on skope too. Gl anyway ckd! 
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    theres alot of people seeing it mate,,alot of good players

    i know there will be alot of bad runs but not as many as there is....just seems abit wrong to what it was but each to there own

    hope you do well and all and would be nice to play you live sometime

    but gona give sky a rest for abit and play other sites

    again gl mate hope you do well

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    alright 1 zero too many.

    1/2,500.

    A very very small minority most of whom r donks, is what I meant.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AMYBRAMYBR
    edited May 2011
    I have a huge amount of respect for you doh, but I do think you may be kind of blinkered on this issue.

    I am unsuccessful onlive these days, fully admit it.  Got into a vicious cycle, then that probably componded the issue.  But how dou you rationalise away else and rover?  Both solid performers online?  Are their POV's moot?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    Ok....

    Well rover played and ran v well for years and made a fortune from nothing.

    He wouldn't have seen a downswing or a period of negative variance during that time. even if he did suffer a abit of run bad, his edge was so big at the stakes he played that he could overcome it, and still win. 

    When he finally got smacked in the face by a proper downsing, one that no1 on the site could overcome, it shocked him, and made him look for external excuses/reasons why he wasn't winning anymore, and he came to the wrong conclusion.

    ----------------------

    elsadog plays the biggest tournys on the site. When he runs bad, his edge is not big enough to overcome the negative variance, because the general standard is better - therefore his results will suffer. 

    I think he got to the point where he was beating himself before the tourny even started. He expected the worst, which made him play worse. Playing below par and running below par = bad results.

    He had 1 deep run in an 8pm. The following week he went deep in like 3 of the next 5 main events and has been on fire ever since, popping up in the cash in the big tournys every other day.

    Alot of his comments I believe (and he admits) are tongue in cheek. But theres no doubt that when you're hit by a bad run, it can rock even the most experienced players, and they stop thinking clearly, both in the games they play, and also how they attribute their failure.

    ----------------------------------

    They are just my opinions, apologies if either are offended by any of my comments, but they/you are both v good winning players who I'd rather not have on my table. I respect their games, if not their opinions of the rng! lol.


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AMYBRAMYBR
    edited May 2011
    No respect it sir, I dont think you can ask for a fuller answer than that.

    Ok, push the boat out. myself then.  I crush live play.  There's no table  I sit at where I feel in bad shape.  Played major live T's, make enough of 60 seater live MTT's and smallish  casino stakes to live off quite well.

    Have had one MAJOR mtt score online, but I cant beat online, perhaps for the reasons you've seen me explore.

    I dont know either way myself anymore TBH bud.  I'd loe to cradle myself in the fact that their are issues in online poker.  But I do realise that there are huge flaws in my online game.   Garrh I cant decide :)

    Have been seeing sick suckouts live for quite awhile that i've kept in a notebook sidemarked:  INTERNET HAND :)

    I've always said that the skillset is different, each individual comparitively playing better/worse online!!!!

    Who knows I guess.  All i know is I make better big folds (gregghogg style) live than I do live, where I likely perceive BB's where they arent, as I'd muster a fold live, if that makes sense??

    Jury officiolly out sir
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011

    I dunno with you....

    I've never played live, so I dunno what the standard is like for myself but have heard it's bad......

    But maybe you should be more realistic with the games you play. Play well below the level you should be until you start winning. play 10/20p - 25/50p cash, and 10/20 quid tournys.

    You might then start to struggle for motivation to play, as the money may be insignificant, but winning at 25/50p has got to be more enjoyable than losing at £1.50/3

    I think you should 1 table too, until you start winning. Make it as "live-like" as you can. Build loads of notes on every player at the table.

    When you start winning, move through the levels like normal online players.

    You say live and online r completelty different, so treat them so......

    Start playing online with £500 (a very moderate amount considering the stakes you play live) Keep it seperate to your live "bankroll"

    Build it up like all us online players have had to. Start low and get into the winning habit. Learn to win online like you do live, do it the hard way.

    That's what I'd do if I were you anyway.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AMYBRAMYBR
    edited May 2011
    It just bores me bud.  But more than that I need more processing time.

    Way I see it is I blew my big chance online, I'll never have the patience again.  People can pick this up and insult me if they like, but  I highlight it myself.  My ego IS an issue,  I have said on here since day 1, check, I have huge respect for online cash pros.

    I need the extra time, feel and basic human interaction.  Its no fun without it, leading me to stupid mistakes.  I just dont read well online,  or play well and I cant see this changing without more time and effort than its worth (to me)

    Your a gent and voice of candid diplomocy as always doh, credit to you.  My faults are me and my perceptions of online players, not my technical game.  So I have to overcome that issue before I tackle the other.  But your advice is earestly well received bud.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    Ok.... Well rover played and ran v well for years and made a fortune from nothing. He wouldn't have seen a downswing or a period of negative variance during that time. even if he did suffer a abit of run bad, his edge was so big at the stakes he played that he could overcome it, and still win.  When he finally got smacked in the face by a proper downsing, one that no1 on the site could overcome, it shocked him, and made him look for external excuses/reasons why he wasn't winning anymore, and he came to the wrong conclusion. ---------------------- elsadog plays the biggest tournys on the site. When he runs bad, his edge is not big enough to overcome the negative variance, because the general standard is better - therefore his results will suffer.  I think he got to the point where he was beating himself before the tourny even started. He expected the worst, which made him play worse. Playing below par and running below par = bad results. He had 1 deep run in an 8pm. The following week he went deep in like 3 of the next 5 main events and has been on fire ever since, popping up in the cash in the big tournys every other day. Alot of his comments I believe (and he admits) are tongue in cheek. But theres no doubt that when you're hit by a bad run, it can rock even the most experienced players, and they stop thinking clearly, both in the games they play, and also how they attribute their failure. ---------------------------------- They are just my opinions, apologies if either are offended by any of my comments, but they/you are both v good winning players who I'd rather not have on my table. I respect their games, if not their opinions of the rng! lol.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    Good answer and good applied logic.

    Just a correction on my bit. My downswing on Sky was 5 months. Meanwhile I was cashing regularly on other sites. I started posting the ''differences'' between the sites and my running  suddenly improved. I didn't win because I just happened to go deep in one and suddenly became a better player. 

    Something changed on here a while ago. If you can't see that so be it. Personally I think it's outside the norm. 

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011

    If I had the bankroll you must have to be able to play those stakes live I wouldn't even bother online.

    I'd maybe play v v occasionally the big events like sunday million/scoop etc just for fun, or bang a couple of buy ins on to play 100nl for a few hours if I was bored.

    No way would I ever play to the extent that it became boring playing. I would be doin it as entertainment, so if it got boring it kinda defeats the whole point of me playing in the first place.

    Buy a playstation or sumthin instead! lol
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AMYBRAMYBR
    edited May 2011
    Already done bud.  Its embarresing to say but I havent played on here in 3 months :p

    I banged a bit on PS, extracted my deposit.  Came 147th in a 14000 field for a decent pay day, but beyond that was cooler after cooler reinforcing my negative outlook.

    I think cash players do play better online.  I dont win live because I play great, again I've said this b4.  I win because I go to games where I know ppl treat the money I care about as confetti, I nit up i get paid, simple.

    I've been winning alot lately so am thinking of taking a real run at it soon.  I have a figure in mind then I'm on a poker holiday (playing, not breaking from)

    Not ps3, xbox 360. Defdean if anyone want it.  Beasting crackdown2 and BULLETSTORMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM lately :p  Always Mass effect also :p
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby?action=show_static&page=poker_community_forums&plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3a57795ac2-1793-4377-b4cf-e124b0f555f4Forum%3adf77f82c-151f-4bea-aae1-fb423dcae1faDiscussion%3a1f5a3845-c51d-43be-9c59-63d8f394eab7

    Right on cue theres a new geezer posting about it being rigged. ^^^^^^^^^^^

    Skoped him, and sure enough, he has the goldfish bowl. lol.


    I'm still playing donkeykong country on the game boy.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • djblacke04djblacke04
    edited May 2011



    Lets be honest,it have become obvious to all the good players what is going on,and unfortunately we expected better...I think brands like SKY ,being household names have a duty of care to all their customers....why they did it,greed,like all businesses,i realized a long time ago something was amiss,and that certain mathmatical improbabilities,were regular occurances...

    It is very sad that in this day and age,we cant , as adults play a simple game of poker...

    Limiting,why,who knows,you had some great games,but now its all going down the pan..

    i have played over 2700 games on here,but tbh i am bored of the continuous outdraws,setups,AAvKKvA10 and a flop of AKQ turn J river 2...its just wrong....

    I would also like to point out , that i play much bigger stakes live than i would ever play online....and i see regular players who win between 2k and 4k a month playing £1 cash tables at the casino...3 nights a week...

    and to you dohhhhh, have you ever read the story called 'the emperor s new clothes'....


    I think the time is coming...and it s about time we all stood up...together....and stopped being fobbed off with ridiculous remarks like 'oh its Variance'


    And i tell you something last weeks SKY ROLLER.was 6 under guarantee,and there were 8 players left,7 total regs who play all the time everyday...and 1 who had started playing tournements that night....guess who won...

    NewZefFlow         2$1,534  $107  809%$3,068  -94SkyPoker



    and has not played since....

    yeah ,yeah ,yeah.......have got a list of these winners who,win once and are never seen again...
     and just so you know...

    EvoStar         1$529  $29  1682%$529  -86SkyPoker


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    When 200,000 players sign up to a poker site, some of them are going to win the first tournament they ever play.

    If everyones first tourny is a 50 runner affair, such as the sky roller, it would be expected that around 4,000 of the 200,000 players would win it.

    The New Zeland guy was playing 50nl the other day and seems a good player. Magical man will be happy that some quality players are coming to sky.

    Unfortunately, I'm not so chuffed about it :(

    I'm sure he'll play it again soon.

    I've never read that story btw.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    When 200,000 players sign up to a poker site, some of them are going to win the first tournament they ever play. If everyones first tourny is a 50 runner affair, such as the sky roller, it would be expected that around 4,000 of the 200,000 players would win it. The New Zeland guy was playing 50nl the other day and seems a good player. Magical man will be happy that some quality players are coming to sky. Unfortunately, I'm not so chuffed about it :( I'm sure he'll play it again soon. I've never read that story btw.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    Just checked and there are 2700 on tables at the moment. From a supposed pool of 200,000 does that not strike you as a little odd. Your maths are totally meaningless!


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    So is DJ's point.

    I don't even know what it is, but I think he's saying sky let you win when your new to get you hooked?

    Whatever the figure is, divide it by 50 and thats how many people should win their first mtt assuming it's a 50 runner affair.

    Twice you have had a go at my numbers. The numbers themselves are irrelevant. It's the relationship between the 2 numbers that's important. 


    Use whatever numbers you want

    2,700 new players on sky, all play a 50 runner mtt as their first game = approximately 54 first time winners expected.

    It's not unusual.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    So is DJ's point. I don't even know what it is, but I think he's saying sky let you win when your new to get you hooked? Whatever the figure is, divide it by 50 and thats how many people should win their first mtt assuming it's a 50 runner affair. Twice you have had a go at my numbers. The numbers themselves are irrelevant. It's the relationship between the 2 numbers that's important.  Use whatever numbers you want 2,700 new players on sky, all play a 50 runner mtt as their first game = approximately 54 first time winners expected. It's not unusual.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    Of course it is - you are assuming that ALL players are the new players. 

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IRISHROVERIRISHROVER
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    Ok.... Well rover played and ran v well for years and made a fortune from nothing. He wouldn't have seen a downswing or a period of negative variance during that time. even if he did suffer a abit of run bad, his edge was so big at the stakes he played that he could overcome it, and still win.  When he finally got smacked in the face by a proper downsing, one that no1 on the site could overcome, it shocked him, and made him look for external excuses/reasons why he wasn't winning anymore, and he came to the wrong conclusion. ---------------------- elsadog plays the biggest tournys on the site. When he runs bad, his edge is not big enough to overcome the negative variance, because the general standard is better - therefore his results will suffer.  I think he got to the point where he was beating himself before the tourny even started. He expected the worst, which made him play worse. Playing below par and running below par = bad results. He had 1 deep run in an 8pm. The following week he went deep in like 3 of the next 5 main events and has been on fire ever since, popping up in the cash in the big tournys every other day. Alot of his comments I believe (and he admits) are tongue in cheek. But theres no doubt that when you're hit by a bad run, it can rock even the most experienced players, and they stop thinking clearly, both in the games they play, and also how they attribute their failure. ---------------------------------- They are just my opinions, apologies if either are offended by any of my comments, but they/you are both v good winning players who I'd rather not have on my table. I respect their games, if not their opinions of the rng! lol.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    YOU HAVE SHARKSCOPE ,
    COME ON  DOH ,
    LOOK IN,
     NO DOWNSWING ,
    BUT I STILL LOVE YOUR BANTER .

    SHARKSCOPE GRAPH FTW LOL

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    Take 2,000 break even players who have never played on sky.

    Take 49 break even players from sky.

    Give each of the 2,000 players 1 free mtt against the same 49 players from sky.

    How many of the 2,000 newbies would you expect to win their tourny?



    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • djblacke04djblacke04
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    So is DJ's point. I don't even know what it is, but I think he's saying sky let you win when your new to get you hooked? Whatever the figure is, divide it by 50 and thats how many people should win their first mtt assuming it's a 50 runner affair. Twice you have had a go at my numbers. The numbers themselves are irrelevant. It's the relationship between the 2 numbers that's important.  Use whatever numbers you want 2,700 new players on sky, all play a 50 runner mtt as their first game = approximately 54 first time winners expected. It's not unusual.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    Show me One other player in last weeks SKY ROLLER that was new that week...


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    It's a 50/1 shot.

    Show me the last time a new player played a 50 runner tourny and won.

    Prob approximately 49 50 runner tournys ago ;)

    But again......thats a miniscule sample size, you'd have to assess billions of  tournys, more than have or will ever run on sky to even get close to proving anything.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • unknown_usernameunknown_username
    edited May 2011
    It's quite simple from my view.

    When we ran the RNG threads, on a number of occasions the management were invited to comment on what was being 'seen' by players. The only reply was that the site has a certificate of conformity for the RNG. When questions were asked no answer was forthcoming. The same questions were asked of the Alderney GGC and RNG testers. They didn't or wouldn't or couldn't answer them. At that point the thread was closed!

    It seems a simple solution to answer those questions and put this thing to bed once and for all - and yet they don't do that. 

    I only have one question - WHY?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • djblacke04djblacke04
    edited May 2011


    You ever heard of Bruce Grobbelaar?

    lol...

    he let in a lot of goals,,but there was only a few they were worried about...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011

    I dunno, I think the interaction on this forum between clients and "staff" is terrible. (barring TK and the 865 ppl)

    I dunno what it's like on other forums, this might be normal, but the "decision makers" seem to hide behind TK all the time.

    TK doesn't decide that micro dyms should have 20% rake, yet when I asked why on a thread he replied at least 10 times, whilst the people who made the decision to be "stake-ist" prob didn't even read it.

    I'm not sure what they could say to re-assure you, but I agree they should at least try.

    They just can't be a^rsed, too busy counting their money.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • djblacke04djblacke04
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    I dunno, I think the interaction on this forum between clients and "staff" is terrible. (barring TK and the 865 ppl) I dunno what it's like on other forums, this might be normal, but the "decision makers" seem to hide behind TK all the time. TK doesn't decide that micro dyms should have 20% rake, yet when I asked why on a thread he replied at least 10 times, whilst the people who made the decision to be   "stake-ist" prob didn't even read it. I'm not sure what they could say to re-assure you, but I agree they should at least try. They just can't be a^rsed, too busy counting their money.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    and the relevancy to this thread is?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    Responding to/agreeing with elsadog about skys reluctance to interact with their clients.

    I will quote the posts I'm replying to in future, sorry.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IRISHROVERIRISHROVER
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    Responding to/agreeing with elsadog about skys reluctance to interact with their clients. I will quote the posts I'm replying to in future, sorry.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH
    and my graph lol  ?

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here : and my graph lol  ?
    Posted by IRISHROVER
    I made the assumption that you must have been losing?

    If you weren't losing, why would you leave?

    Maybe your edge really was huge enough to withstand a downswing and still not lose then!!!  lol

    Your graph is insane, the most impressive stats of anyone on sky. If I was you I would never play again just incase I ruined it! Like getting a new football for xmas and not wanting to get it dirty. lol.

    ***Btw I'm currently going through my worst downswing in 3 years, and am taking a week off playing poker for the first time since I went abroad 18 months ago.


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • djblacke04djblacke04
    edited May 2011
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here:
    In Response to Re: have to agree with alot of you on here : I made the assumption that you must have been losing? If you weren't losing, why would you leave? Maybe your edge really was huge enough to withstand a downswing and still not lose then!!!  lol Your graph is insane, the most impressive stats of anyone on sky. If I was you I would never play again just incase I ruined it! Like getting a new football for xmas and not wanting to get it dirty. lol. ***Btw I'm currently going through my worst downswing in 3 years, and am taking a week off playing poker for the first time since I went abroad 18 months ago.
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    Guess that s just Variance...:)

    'he has no clothes on' said the little boy..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.