07-14-04, LearnTexasHoldem:
UB Algorithm Cont...
I read with interest the question regarding Ultimate Bet's Algorithm and I'd like to make a couple of points, if you don't mind.
Top 3 Beginner Rooms
2. On some of the poker sites I've visited (Ladbrokes, for example), they have letters of approval from internationally renowned auditors (in this case 'Price Waterhouse Coopers').
3. It's quite easy to fall into the trap of questioning card activity because of the amount of hands that are played. See the rigging question dated 1 July 2004. Players always remember the times their AA is beaten because they were beaten and Human Beings do strange things at odd times, which is out of character! It's what makes us Human! In my home games, we play about 1 hand every 7 minutes on average. On line I can play twice that, quite easily. If I'm playing more than 1 table it's even more!
4. In this particular instance, the turn is predicted to be 1 of 5 cards listed: i.e. 6 (4 of), K (4 of), pair 1 of the flop cards J,8,3 (3 of, each). This gives a total of 17 cards, which is generally acknowledged to be a 1/2, odds on, (I think the American version is 2/1 favourite), which is actually a 67% probability. Whilst the questioners 81% of sample, for this occurrence, is somewhat high, the sample is relatively small and I respectfully suggest that a larger sample would even this out to approximately the 67% probability that it mathematically is.
5. The odds of the River behaving in the same fashion as the Turn, if the Turn doesn't hit the prediction, are going to be similar. Are they not? (47 cards v 46 cards).
I hope you find this useful. I am not a mathematician, neither am I a poker player (I've only been playing for 6 or 7 weeks). This is just my 'take' on online poker which apart from the occasional home game with my friends, is the only way I play.
What do you think, PokerMeister?
Answer: I think that once you assume an outfit is cheating you'll find more and more evidence to support that position. That doesn't mean that no one is cheating, there is always that chance. My advice is to just start slow and let the online site earn your trust. If they fail, try elsewhere. There is enough competition now that you have a lot of options for where to play (offline and online).
To comment on your points:
1. I think some do use microgaming software but others have propriety systems.
2. Many of the sites do post that they have had an independent company assess their logs to show that their shuffling is truly random; that in and of itself doesn't instill a higher level of trust in me. I'm not accusing any company of cheating but that audit doesn't look at the whole system nor does it check more then once. I would judge things on my personal experience alone since it's my money.
3. It is true that we remember more of our losses then our victories. I do have to say though that losing online is different then losing offline. For example, you won't find many people who won't call a bet for 10 rounds, then just decide to play A2 off when I raise with Queens to flop AA2A4. That lack of consistency is suspicious to me. Offline people are consistent, the person who plays 94 under-the-gun to crack your AA is going to be in on every other hand too, not just the one that beats you heads up.
4. That is true that a large sampling is needed before empirical probability and classical probability match. Try flipping a coin 10 times and see if it is exactly 50/50. If you do it enough it will be but 10 times probably won't be enough.
5. Yes it's 47 then 46 so there isn't any real difference.
The bottom line is if you feel like you're being cheated, change websites or brandish a weapon and tell your buddies to stop dealing from the bottom of the deck or somebody is going to get it.
Your rating:
Click on the clover of your choiceTop 5 Poker Rooms
| Colt Poker Free $10 | Read Review |
|---|---|
| Cake Poker Free $10 | Read Review |
| Minted Poker | Read Review |
| Poker Stars | Read Review |
| 888poker | Read Review |
