Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.

jonjo75

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

 Many people have lost there lives [burnt at stake etc]for being in "higher peoples" minds being ridiculous for saying things like the earth is not the centre of the universe and it revolves around the sun etc . But with "higher knowledge" than the people who condemned them , have been proved right.
Posted by booboo5205

Area 51s comparing themselves to Copernicus and other groundbreaking scientists.
Another CLASSIC, keep them coming .
 

djblacke04

 so if we narrow it down to all in preflops,then you can all be happy with the results

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

 so if we narrow it down to all in preflops,then you can all be happy with the results
Posted by djblacke04

No, nobody suggested that, Toby, & it would be as illogical & irrational as "only showdowns count". In my personal opinion, of course.

If - IF - you want the "survey" to have a shred of credibility, it must include every time K-K is dealt, ("showdown only" has absolutely no relevance) & must assume the hand is played with a reasonable degree of competenence.
 
I'm curious as to what point exactly you are trying to make.
 
Would you be so kind as to, in the words of Rory Breaker, enlighten us? 



 

djblacke04

As the title suggests,probabilities,our study so far.... not looking good.....

and i like your point of credibility,thats a great idea,send me the hand historys for all the KK ever dealt... love it tikay .. great suggestion.

LadyFingrs

YES TK WE KNOW YOU HAVE THEM, GIVE US THE HDAN HISTORYS I KNOW U HAV THEM IN A FOLDER OR SUM SHT PLZ SEND THEM TO MY ADRES CARDBORD BOX OUTSIDE TESCOS IN MANCHESTR CHEERS MAN!!!!1

OUR EYES ARE WIDE OPEN TK WERE LIKE KNEECHY OR WHATEVER HE WAS CALED

Tikay10

So what point are you attempting to make via this thread, Toby?

djblacke04

That KK and PP dont look good.

unknown_username

You will never prove anything with a few numbers. If any poker site were to ''adjust'' the randomness of the RNG it would be immediately provable and they are certainly not that naive.

You also have to question the motives of any site that might decide to alter the game in any way. Certainly giving advantage or disadvantage to certain players doesn't appear to have any benefits to the site. Giving advantage to some players would have the effect of removing money from the site and declining numbers of players. Disadvantaging certain players would have the same effect.

The aims of all poker sites is to retain players and money in play wherever possible.

Any manipulation would have to be either:

a) very complicated if the natural odds are to be changed and any checks on the RNG are to pass scrutiny......  or,

b) very simple and not effect the RNG output in any way.

If the RNG output were altered then it would be liable to be found out and would have happened by now. The aims of the site are in conflict with boom or doom, or so it would seem.

However there are theoretical fraudulent means by which any site could achieve it's aims of increasing player numbers and increasing revenue without altering the RNG output of cards. That doesn't mean it is or isn't happening though - just that it could.

Posting hand histories is a waste of everyone's time as they will never be provable one way or the other.

Tikay10

And there you have it.

Personally, if I were a player, & I felt something was "amiss" with a poker site, I would certainly cease playing there immediately, and/or take recourse to Common Law.

djblacke04

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

And there you have it. Personally, if I were a player, & I felt something was "amiss" with a poker site, I would certainly cease playing there immediately, and/or take recourse to Common Law.
Posted by Tikay10

would you .. really?

how would you do that then?

The_Don90

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

You should ask Don if you can include the figures off his spreadsheet. He forgot to add the flip he won in the orfordable when I was watching him though, I had to remind him later. He assures me that's the first one he forgot to add. Think he may have forgot that he's forgot some though. DJ FTW ))
Posted by DOHHHHHHH

I restarted my study after the UKIPT to add more situations to it.

It covers everytime it goes in preflop mostly, however its based on %ages so it actually does include some post flop hands. Il post results too keep people happy anyways. VERY SMALL SAMPLE.

Flips Won	9
Flips Lost	8
Total	17
Dominating Won	8
Dominating Lost	5
Total	13
Dominated Won	3
Dominated Lost	6
Total	9
80%+ Held	7
80%+ Lost	6
Total	13
20% - Won	2
20% - Lost	4
Total	6
60% Won	5
60% Lost	6
Total	11
40% Won	5
40% Lost	4
Total	9

The_Don90

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

You should ask Don if you can include the figures off his spreadsheet. He forgot to add the flip he won in the orfordable when I was watching him though, I had to remind him later. He assures me that's the first one he forgot to add. Think he may have forgot that he's forgot some though. DJ FTW ))
Posted by DOHHHHHHH

I restarted my study after the UKIPT to add more situations to it.

It covers everytime it goes in preflop mostly, however its based on %ages so it actually does include some post flop hands. Il post results too keep people happy anyways. VERY SMALL SAMPLE.

Flips Won	9
Flips Lost	8
Total	17
Dominating Won	8
Dominating Lost	5
Total	13
Dominated Won	3
Dominated Lost	6
Total	9
80%+ Held	7
80%+ Lost	6
Total	13
20% - Won	2
20% - Lost	4
Total	6
60% Won	5
60% Lost	6
Total	11
40% Won	5
40% Lost	4
Total	9

The_Don90

In Response to :

You should ask Don if you can include the figures off his spreadsheet. He forgot to add the flip he won in the orfordable when I was watching him though, I had to remind him later. He assures me that's the first one he forgot to add. Think he may have forgot that he's forgot some though. DJ FTW ))Posted by DOHHHHHHH

I restarted my study after the UKIPT to add more situations to it. It covers everytime it goes in preflop mostly, however its based on %ages so it actually does include some post flop hands. Il post results too keep people happy anyways. VERY SMALL SAMPLE.

The_Don90

dohhhhhhh appolisies for posting several times internet went to haywire.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good. : would you .. really? how would you do that then?
Posted by djblacke04

Of course I would, like a shot! Why would I, or anyone else, not? If ANYONE had a shred, iota, or scintilla of credible evidence, you'd have heard about it long ago, there are no shortage of individuls who would give their right arm to try to prove the point. Not one has, ever.   

If the local Esso petrol station sells me short gallons, do you really think I'd continue to patronise it, or let them off the hook? If they do, GG them.
 
I'm done here, we could go round the houses all day.
 
I'm still curious as to your motice in starting the thread, but never mind.

Look forward to seeing you on Saturday, at SPT Cardiff.

Tikay10

"80%+ Held	7
80%+ Lost	6
20% - Won	2
20% - Lost	4....."

How do those maths work, Don?

Tikay10

Probably best for all if the thread is closed, & I'll request the Mods do so in the morning.

djblacke04

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good. : Of course I would, like a shot! Why would I, or anyone else, not? If ANYONE had a shred, iota, or scintilla of credible evidence, you'd have heard about it long ago, there are no shortage of individuls who would give their right arm to try to prove the point. Not one has, ever.    If the local Esso petrol station sells me short gallons, do you really think I'd continue to patronise it, or let them off the hook? If they do, GG them.   I'm done here, we could go round the houses all day.   I'm still curious as to your motice in starting the thread, but never mind. Look forward to seeing you on Saturday, at SPT Cardiff.
Posted by Tikay10

firstly and sadly i wont be at Cardiff as two of my children have their birthdays this week,one little girl who is 7 and having a build a bear party on the sunday and my 15 year old boy whose birthday is the sunday,having a nice meal and then taking him to the shops for some treats....

Am talking to fellow like minded people about my observations ,am not being rude or insulting,and i have not made any accusations of foul play,i believe that i am adhereing to all the new rules and regulations,governing what is and isnt acceptable,on the forum..

also FYI how would you know if the petrol sation was selling short measures? do you really check all the petrol that goes into your tank? if so, how,? do you have a petrol measurement device that is accurate to + or - 2%?

unknown_username

There are mathmatically accepted percentages of KK winning but they cannot be mixed samples. In other words you can have expected outcomes for KK against all other hands for 2 players but you can't put 3 or 4 players into the mix as they have different expectancies.

All the following winning percentages for KK are when the hand is played to the end of the hand.

For 2 players = 85%

For 3 players = 72%

For 4 players = 63%

Any large sample should fall into the above areas as long as it isn't mixed. However it can be argued that any sample is not large enough.

djblacke04

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

"80%+ Held   7 80%+ Lost 6             20% - Won 2 20% - Lost 4....." How do those maths work, Don?
Posted by Tikay10

i would assume that there was 13 hands at 80% fav of which he won 7 and lost 6

Tikay10

I'm sorry you will not be at Cardiff, but I hope you enjoy the kids birthdays.

I beliieve your comments ARE insulting, because they suggest impropriety, or discrimination, but it's a cross we must bear, especially difficult because if we ever accused YOU of impropriety without credible evidence, you'd be mortally offended, & might well get upset, & quite right too - because there is no proof or even suggestion that you are, so we would not do so. Quid pro quo & all that.
 
How would I know if a petrol station was diddling me? Presumbly, if I had decent grounds to so suspect, I would cease using them, & go see a Trading Standards Officer. If I had no "reasonable grounds", of course, I could not. What I could DEFINITELY not do is stand in the forecourt & shout out to all the customers there - "I BELIEVE THESE PEOPLE ARE SELLING SHORT GALLONS". Do you really think they'd permit me to do that? 

Let's move on, I can't really say much more within my obligation to treat all our Clients with respect.
 
I wish you well & hope you run good at poker, wherever you should choose to play it.   

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

There are mathmatically accepted percentages of KK winning but they cannot be mixed samples. In other words you can have expected outcomes for KK against all other hands for 2 players but you can't put 3 or 4 players into the mix as they have different expectancies. All the following winning percentages for KK are when the hand is played to the end of the hand. For 2 players = 85% For 3 players = 72% For 4 players = 63% Any large sample should fall into the above areas as long as it isn't mixed. However it can be argued that any sample is not large enough.
Posted by elsadog

Pretty much, yes, but an extra variable needs adding - the competence of the player, how he or she plays the hand.

Over a large enough sample, of course, it all balances out. I'd suggest that sample size has to be 10,000 minimum, probaby a lot more, & properly constructed. Pickng & choosing to suit is a kite that ain't ever gonna fly, no matter how much some may wish it to.
 
And so concludes, I hope, my annual foray into Area 51!

Goodnight all, & lets go enjoy our poker, or, in my case at this time of night, my bed.  

unknown_username

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good. : Pretty much, yes, but an extra variable needs adding - the competence of the player, how he or she plays the hand. Over a large enough sample, of course, it all balances out. I'd suggest that sample size has to be 10,000 minimum, probaby a lot more, & properly constructed. Pickng & choosing to suit is a kite that ain't ever gonna fly, no matter how much some may wish it to.   And so concluudes, I hope, my annual foray into Area 51! Goodnight all, & lets go enjoy our poker, or, in my case at this time of night, my bed.  
Posted by Tikay10

Those percentages are when played to the end of the hand - maybe I should have said river.

There is no mathematical formula that encompasses skill.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good. : Those percentages are when played to the end of the hand - maybe I should have said river.
Posted by elsadog

Ahh, now I see what you mean  - "end of the hand" & "river" are of course very different things.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good. : Those percentages are when played to the end of the hand - maybe I should have said river. There is no mathematical formula that encompasses skill.
Posted by elsadog

Correct, or even "lack of" in some cases. But it IS a genuine variable, though I rarely see anyone admit to it. It's easier to blame other factors I suppose.  

djblacke04

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good.:

In Response to Re: Probabilites....and our study so far..not looking good. : Pretty much, yes, but an extra variable needs adding - the competence of the player, how he or she plays the hand. Over a large enough sample, of course, it all balances out. I'd suggest that sample size has to be 10,000 minimum, probaby a lot more, & properly constructed. Pickng & choosing to suit is a kite that ain't ever gonna fly, no matter how much some may wish it to.   And so concludes, I hope, my annual foray into Area 51! Goodnight all, & lets go enjoy our poker, or, in my case at this time of night, my bed.  
Posted by Tikay10

you could easily send us the last 10,000 hand s played on sky...then we could all have a look...

simple.....no fuss , no bother...

and also if i suspected the petrol station of shorting me on petrol i would go into the station with a jerry can fill it with one litre of petrol then measure it at home...thus proving one way or another .

LadyFingrs

I have never lost with KK. I attribute this to being better than everyone.

GREGHOGG

I only lose when

1. I have played a hand badly
2. I have played a hand well or "correctly" and been outdrawn or "coolered"

As long as 2 happens more than 1, i am happy

Anyone who keeps logs of 2, should work on trying to avoid 1 happening

2 is unavoidable and part of the game of poker

1 is avoidable

THE END

Sky_Poker

Perhaps this started as 'tongue in cheek' or for fun but we need to stop this now. 

Our reputation is paramount to us. Tikay and others have explained this eloquenly.

Please remember the statement in our forum rules around posting comments that "that can be construed to question Sky Poker's integrity, game fairness, security or random number generation".

Please think carefully before posting anything similar, even on Area 51.

Thread closed.

Sky Poker