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.
long winded but true
POKERBOTS:
I can already hear the groans from all those who are quick to jump to the defence of online poker…(in this case sky)…for some reason I can’t fathom…but note it is always the usual suspects…whereas when claims of rigged surface…they come from many and varied sources…that in itself tells a story…I would like to start with a short history of my poker play…(pre marriage and fatherhood…of course). I well remember the heady days of youth..when every weekend you could be sure of finding as many school as you desired in any given weekend…. Of course in those days you didn’t all gather like the knights of king Arthur around a round table…any floor..in any condition was a more than suitable venue… Do you know what I remember most… I won..I won a lot…in fact I would go so far as to say… I relied on these schools to supplement my meagre wages. Obviously..there were no millions on offer…and the winnings from one weekend didn’t carry over to the next… what with alcohol.. dances.. horses.. and women… (if your my wife.. or my then girlfriend..please ignore the latter)…(pretty please)… I always remembered to bring a poker text book along… as some these venues were woefully short of toilet roll.. and sometimes you needed to straighten out your paper money. In short.. I played a lot of poker… and since there are still 52 cards in a deck… and a flush still beats a straight… I don’t see why the game should be any different to the old adage of riding a bike… However.. it is online.
CONDITIONING:
I was reading a novel the other night…(objection)… it really is pertinent to what I have to say…(sustained). The book was called “CULT”… (if you haven’t..you really must)…whoops…(I mean read the book ..not join a cult). As suggested by the title..it is all about mind control and deprogramming..and there was an absolutely cracking debate concerning conditioning…very very subtle..in fact close to subliminal conditioning over “SCARILY”..not so long periods of time. Condition is nothing new..unfortunately..or as some think.. fortunately…it’s not a way of life..it is life..from getting up early in the morning..wearing a school tie..and going to bed at a reasonable hour…(that’s why the nightshift killed me…I was conditioned for days)… Anyway let me get to my point… Woe betide those who have only ever played serious poker online..because after a very short period of time they will come to believe that this is the way poker is meant to be….and after a while even those who have played live in the past..will succumb to the age of technologic corporate conditioning…. I did…before finally realising that my gut instinct has always been as good as a full house ace’s over three’s
The fact is…I’ve won…in three months I’ve won three deepstacks..i’ve had multiple placings and lots of bounties….but I don’t feel as if I’ve won…certainly not on my own merits…I don’t just watch my own hands at a table…I watch every hand and every bet..from the stupid to the sublime..and weather you believe me or not…these things do happen in poker….but around about 99.5% less than they do online…and forget about all the textbook quoters saying you shouldn’t do this and you shouldn’t play like that…you play to your opponents strengths and weakness after watching them play every hand for ages…watch a tournament on the box….where’s the text book…certainly not under the arm of someone wearing a bracelet…(of course that doesn’t mean they didn’t make a fortune writing a book…little devils)
As a parting thought…many say (usual suspects again..i could name them all without checking).. your not playing sky…your playing people… I say you’re playing a pre-programmed computer.. a device that can make a million calculations in a second..without the aid of an abacus…if you think it cant isolate a thousand players who regularly buy into another tournament as soon as they get papped out of the one they’re in….well what can I say….”A computer computes”. Now..since I’ve become somewhat of a pokerbot myself…I think I’ll go and find a tournament to buy into…and see if it’s time for this dog to get thrown his bone. ave
Comments
"People offering points of view that all is well and unquestionable in regard to online poker are treated with credibility, wheras those offering an alternate viewpoint and asking appropriate questions are ridiculed and demonised".
Devils advocate hat on: it is the sites right to do this, as this is after all an online poker site - why shouldnt they take this standpoint?
I dont know if I agree with all of the OP, but I do think it is an individuals frank take on his experiences (just as the "poker is rigged - in favour of those that are good at it" thread that went up in general poker chat this week - which was naturally celebrated -). I dont see why both cant be treated with respect and credibility, rather than the inherant bias making one a worthy read, the other being put in the derogatorily named area 51.
Enjoyable read and frank commentary bud.
This was a great read, everyone is entitled to an opinion and i think there are far to many people on here quick to criticse!
The question as to whether interference to the natural game is needed or desirable is a complex one. There are most certainly good reasons to influence the game but acieving the desired effects whilst staying within expected parameters makes it difficult. On line poker sites use the fact that the site is regulated and monitored as their defence against those who have doubts regarding the authenticity of the game. Most defenders of the sites use these guarantees as the basis of their belief that all is well, so to some extent it all works nicely. Examination of those guarantees of regulation and monitoring will find that they are far from comprehensive or complete. So that's where we stand at present. From the players point of view there are three camps - those who believe all is completely above board, those who aren't sure, and those who adamantly believe it is a manipulated game.
Those who post a bad beat or a recollection of some hands do themselves no favours when they state that this is proof that the game is rigged. The outcome of any hand is possible and so can easily be cast aside as proof. Most of these posts are done in the ''heat of the moment'' and rarely come across as level-headed judgements and are therefore dismissed out of hand. Those who believe all is well have little problem dismissing these types of claims. If we take two players in a hand and one wins the hand and the other loses, then what we can say is that the winner either played it correctly or got lucky. The loser on the other hand is always open to the suggestion that they played it wrong. Because of this it is rather easy to defend the authenticity of any isolated hand and so he poster becomes the bad guy. One of the most common cries from the good guys is that the sample size is too small, and this is always true. To be certain that there is a fault in the generation and distribution of cards would require an enormous database, and even with billions of card combinations available it would still not be certain that it was outwith the possible, only that it was unlikely. The subject of random is not fully understood by even the best minds in the world so proving that something is amiss is unlikely.
So what are the people who believe that the game is being manipulated basing their conclusions on? Well, as I said earlier, some take a small sample of out-draws, bad beats or whatever led to them losing as proof. Most of those people probably realise the next morning when they've cooled down that it isn't proof of anything other than an unusually bad run of cards. The obvious flaws in their reasoning are pounced upon with the standard answers, it all goes back and forth for a while and eventually disappears off the page. This does no good whatsoever in my opinion. People vent off in poker, they always have and always will. I say let them have their vent and move on. If anything the defenders are far more vociferous than those who doubt and I don't think that does them any favours in the eyes of most observers.
From time to time we get well thought out and put together posts such as edge's. His experience tells him that something isn't quite right and that is HIS experience and therefore should be respected. I've played this game longer than most on this site and by default have a lot of experience. It can be argued that a bad driver of 30 years has just as much experience as a good driver of 30 years but that their views of good driving are different. Poker is similar except that poor players rarely last long. I know the game has changed dramatically over the years, and never more so than in the last 5, and I try to use my experience to adapt to the new conditions I encounter. Whether I'm adapting to a change in the game or a manipulation of the game is not always clear to me. I just learn and adapt and hope it results in a winning formula because that's the only control I have over the game.
Whenever I read a post in area51 I try to see it from the poster's point of view. Whether that is a guy having a rant after a bad night at the tables or a considered post from someone like edge should make no difference. You never know, at the end of the day, they might just be right!
I think it is a very well highlighted point.
Especially when many of the DOH's out there have very limited live experience.
I think everyone has a right to their say bud.
Havent looked at the hands in detail that you base your opinion on.
But either way, he's a guy giving his frank subjective account, surely it can be heard for what it is without the constant negativity by people?
If what you say is right (in regard to hands) then you, aswell as anyone, knows that everyone is on a curve. May be part of his process to come along on that curve.
But equally, much of his post was made up of comparing his live experiences with online right? You yourself have firmly commented you have very little in the way of live experience, so I dont see how you can be so critical.
I've come to agree that my online game is massively at fault on many aspects, my knowledge not being as broad as I once thought, recognising online players strengths. Perhaps you could considor that your knowledge of live isnt comprehensive
Firstly, this isn't a bad beat.
Count up the number of chips edge put in the middle when he had the best hand post flop.
I count zero.
He put 8 thousand+ (well over 100xbb) in when he was behind.
OK, everyone makes mistakes you will say? and plays hands badly? I agree....
But more worrying than that is when I questioned his play, he said something like "yeh why wouldn't I go all in with an Ace Queen flush?" - as though my suggestion that he shouldn't have gone broke was absurd.
So when a guy who thinks this is a bad beat suggests it's rigged, you cannot possibly take him seriously.
po7k3r Big blind 60.00 90.00 1445.00 Your hole cards 9 Q TAFF761 Fold johnn201 Fold gggary Call 60.00 150.00 4387.50 kazza56 Fold edge215 Call 30.00 180.00 8210.00 po7k3r Check Flop 8 10 6 edge215 Bet 60.00 240.00 8150.00 po7k3r Call 60.00 300.00 1385.00 gggary Call 60.00 360.00 4327.50 Turn A edge215 Check po7k3r Check gggary Check River 6 edge215 Bet 360.00 720.00 7790.00 po7k3r Call 360.00 1080.00 1025.00 gggary Raise 720.00 1800.00 3607.50 edge215 All-in 7790.00 9590.00 0.00 po7k3r Fold gggary All-in 3607.50 13197.50 0.00 edge215 Unmatched bet 3822.50 9375.00 3822.50 edge215 Show 9 Q gggary Show 6 8 gggary Win Full House, 6s and 8s 9375.00 9375.00
Doh, what have his results got to do with this thread? I think posting he has bad results is both unfair and unnecessary, its bordering on petty imo. You think his post is nonsense, thats your right, but there is no need to go into how good or bad he is when it has no relevance to what he is saying here
Now as regards the actual post. You won some money playing live poker, good for you, you think online is different? Why? Obv there are certain differences in the mechanics but its basically the same game, although live has some skills that are not really factors in online games
"woe betide those who only play online poker". lol. Poker live and online will have huge variance, I dont play much live but the same beats happen as far as I can see, probably more in fact because the standard in live games I play is often worse than the online games I play.
As regards textbooks etc, they have a place (I've never seen one that doesnt say adjusting to your opponents is important btw). You dont have to play like a robot, but reading the better books will usually improve your game. Even though its a game where you have to adjust hugely to individual situations basic poker theory is still an important foundation to good players games. Yes the top players will make unorthodox plays, but if you think they dont spend a lot of time studying the game you are deluding yourself
Is online poker rigged? I doubt it, but I think its very dangerous of players to just decide that it is definitely not.Multi million corporations are usually capable of not being very worried about ethics etc when there is money to be made, and the technology to rig it in the way you describe would certainly be there. My own opinion at the moment is that there would be too much of a risk v the reward for companies to rig online poker, and I see no good evidence it is rigged, but thats just my opinion its not a a fact
Either way, nice conversation starte edge
Makes me think that people should be encouraged to put up their thoughts on a platform where thay arent afraid they'll be shouted down, as has been the standard lately.
I think results are very relevant to the thread when he is using them to justify that the site is fixed, and also if he is a losing player it will give less weight to his argument since he could feasibly be using the idea that the site is rigged to detract from his own shortcomings.
Look I dont agree with his post, but its area 51 ffs. I think people posting that other players are losing players is bad form (especially as they dont have access to all their results), judge them on their posts, and I have no problem with anyone ripping apart the content of his post