POKER STARS MATH AINT RIGHT

[doggystyle]

I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi table
tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in poker , and
played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind boggling.I
am by no means an "expert" at the math in poker , but I do understand it .TIME
AFTER TIME AFTER TIME I see "trick shots" in all-in situations. As paranoid as
it may sound to some , I do not believe that all players , in all situations are
being treated fairly , and honestly. I recently got an advertisement from a
start up site that refers to a program that penalizes winners or better players
I am aware that weird things happen in poker and these are the ones that people
tend to remember. I have noticed the long lapse time in between cards at Poker
Stars, and I have also noticed that when a Player is drawing dead before the
last card that it tends to come out much quicker.   I would like to ask one of
the "geniuses" in poker math to monitor this and report their findings. I know
several people who have quit this site screaming "foul", and I have quit the
site for the last time today. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this subject
that go deeper than just "i lost with aces " I do not believe that everyone who
plays at Poker Stars has the same chance of success. And just so you dont think
that I am another idiot screamin "foul:" cuz I got broke . I made 360 dollars in
the 2 week time frame mentioned , and believe that I should have won more.
PLEASE REPLY TY

_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

Unless you can come up with evidence that online poker is rigged, you have
no options. Speculation will not get you far. Believe me, I work in the
legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
suit here.
I doubt they would risk that.




"doggystyle" <43082245@recpoker.com> wrote in message
news:1130222275$648958@recpoker.com...
>I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi
>table
> tournies at Poker Stars 5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in poker ,
> and
> played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> boggling.I
> am by no means an "expert" at the math in poker , but I do understand it
> .TIME
> AFTER TIME AFTER TIME I see "trick shots" in all-in situations. As
> paranoid as
> it may sound to some , I do not believe that all players , in all
> situations are
> being treated fairly , and honestly. I recently got an advertisement from
> a
> start up site that refers to a program that penalizes winners or better
> players
> I am aware that weird things happen in poker and these are the ones that
> people
> tend to remember. I have noticed the long lapse time in between cards at
> Poker
> Stars, and I have also noticed that when a Player is drawing dead before
> the
> last card that it tends to come out much quicker. I would like to ask one
> of
> the "geniuses" in poker math to monitor this and report their findings. I
> know
> several people who have quit this site screaming "foul", and I have quit
> the
> site for the last time today. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this
> subject
> that go deeper than just "i lost with aces " I do not believe that
> everyone who
> plays at Poker Stars has the same chance of success. And just so you dont
> think
> that I am another idiot screamin "foul:" cuz I got broke . I made 360
> dollars in
> the 2 week time frame mentioned , and believe that I should have won more.
> PLEASE REPLY TY
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Kintantee]

On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:

> I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi table
> tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in poker, and
> played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> boggling.

well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've learned that
poker isn't about long term results....

_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[arlo payne]

On Oct 24 2005 11:46 PM, Goran wrote:

> Unless you can come up with evidence that online poker is rigged, you have
> no options. Speculation will not get you far. Believe me, I work in the
> legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
> massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
> suit here.
> I doubt they would risk that.
You are so full of crap for so many different reasons it is almost funny!.
Next time buy a clue first.

_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[doggystyle]

On Oct 25 2005 1:46 AM, Goran wrote:

> Unless you can come up with evidence that online poker is rigged, you have
> no options. Speculation will not get you far. Believe me, I work in the
> legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
> massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
> suit here.
> I doubt they would risk that.
> There are no legal ramifications . The atty generals office in arizona told me
> that on line poker was illegal in all 50 states. There are absolutely no
> regulatory agencies . The ones listed on the home pages are all phony. I am
> basically looking for intelligent feedback. and  ty for yours
>
>
>
> "doggystyle" <43082245@recpoker.com> wrote in message
> news:1130222275$648958@recpoker.com...
> >I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi
> >table
> > tournies at Poker Stars 5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in poker ,
> > and
> > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> > boggling.I
> > am by no means an "expert" at the math in poker , but I do understand it
> > .TIME
> > AFTER TIME AFTER TIME I see "trick shots" in all-in situations. As
> > paranoid as
> > it may sound to some , I do not believe that all players , in all
> > situations are
> > being treated fairly , and honestly. I recently got an advertisement from
> > a
> > start up site that refers to a program that penalizes winners or better
> > players
> > I am aware that weird things happen in poker and these are the ones that
> > people
> > tend to remember. I have noticed the long lapse time in between cards at
> > Poker
> > Stars, and I have also noticed that when a Player is drawing dead before
> > the
> > last card that it tends to come out much quicker. I would like to ask one
> > of
> > the "geniuses" in poker math to monitor this and report their findings. I
> > know
> > several people who have quit this site screaming "foul", and I have quit
> > the
> > site for the last time today. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this
> > subject
> > that go deeper than just "i lost with aces " I do not believe that
> > everyone who
> > plays at Poker Stars has the same chance of success. And just so you dont
> > think
> > that I am another idiot screamin "foul:" cuz I got broke . I made 360
> > dollars in
> > the 2 week time frame mentioned , and believe that I should have won more.
> > PLEASE REPLY TY
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________
> > The Largest Online Poker Community - /



_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com

[doggystyle]

On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:

>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
>
> > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi
> > table
> > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in
> > poker, and
> > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> > boggling.
>
> well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've learned
> that
> poker isn't about long term results....

of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about


_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Blackize]

Yep. Your two weeks of play at a site sure tells the whole story about whether
or not all players are treated fairly.

On Oct 25 2005 3:04 AM, doggystyle wrote:

>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> >
> > > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi
> > > table
> > > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in
> > > poker, and
> > > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> > > boggling.
> >
> > well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've learned
> > that
> > poker isn't about long term results....
>
> of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about
>



_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[doggystyle]

On Oct 25 2005 2:14 AM, Blackize wrote:

> Yep. Your two weeks of play at a site sure tells the whole story about whether
> or not all players are treated fairly.
>
> On Oct 25 2005 3:04 AM, doggystyle wrote:
>
> >
> >
how do people as lame as you ever acquire enough money to afford a computer?
narrow minded and ignorant and incapable of quantitative thinking is a terrible
way to go thru life   but GL
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi
> > > > table
> > > > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in
> > > > poker, and
> > > > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> > > > boggling.
> > >
> > > well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've learned
> > > that
> > > poker isn't about long term results....
> >
> > of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about
> >
>
>



_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com

[Blackize]

You played for 2 weeks on poker stars. The most hands you could have possibly
logged would be roughly 20000. That would be if you played poker just about all
day every day. 20000 hands is not the long run. You cannot draw conclusions
about the bias of a site after 20000 hands. Yet you want us to put stock in your
observations over 2 weeks that the best hand(preflop) doesn't win often enough
at poker stars.

Come back when you hit 1 million hands and maybe then you can claim the site has
a bias. As for now your post is meaningless, it has been discussed a million
times before, and youre a dick. Try running a search on "is rigged" as the
subject line. You will find that many other supposed experts such as yourself
have based judgements of a site on a few hands, only to be upset when those of
us with 100s of thousands of hands logged say that there is no bias that it is
not rigged.


On Oct 25 2005 3:26 AM, doggystyle wrote:

>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 2:14 AM, Blackize wrote:
>
> > Yep. Your two weeks of play at a site sure tells the whole story about
> > whether
> > or not all players are treated fairly.
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 3:04 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> how do people as lame as you ever acquire enough money to afford a computer?
> narrow minded and ignorant and incapable of quantitative thinking is a
> terrible
> way to go thru life   but GL
> > >
> > > On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in
> > > > > multi
> > > > > table
> > > > > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in
> > > > > poker, and
> > > > > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> > > > > boggling.
> > > >
> > > > well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've
> > > > learned
> > > > that
> > > > poker isn't about long term results....
> > >
> > > of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com

[Mav2000]

Well dog, i've played thousands of hands on line and have been faced by the same
dilemma.  Intuitively you know what your seeing doesn't make sense but how do
you prove it.  The incentives for online rooms to cheat are obvious, and they
conduct business in an environement completely devoid of oversight.  It's
difficult for me to conceive of the government of Gibraltar or Pago Pago or
wherever these guys are based "cracking down" on a fixed operation to protect
our interests. 

I have a few ideas on how this can be accomplished - simply an in idea of how to
track cards dealt, calculate what the outcomes should be based on probability,
and then compare them to actual experience at various sites.  If you rinterested
in continuing the discussion, contact me at pokermav2000@yahoo.com.  I would
talk about it here but i don't want to put up with the morons who will start
posting about how its just "bad beats" and "that's poker" and "you just suck I
won 100k at poker stars last year" etc. 





On Oct 24 2005 11:37 PM, doggystyle wrote:

> I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi table
> tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in poker ,
> and
> played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
> boggling.I
> am by no means an "expert" at the math in poker , but I do understand it .TIME
> AFTER TIME AFTER TIME I see "trick shots" in all-in situations. As paranoid as
> it may sound to some , I do not believe that all players , in all situations
> are
> being treated fairly , and honestly. I recently got an advertisement from a
> start up site that refers to a program that penalizes winners or better
> players
> .I am aware that weird things happen in poker and these are the ones that
> people
> tend to remember. I have noticed the long lapse time in between cards at Poker
> Stars, and I have also noticed that when a Player is drawing dead before the
> last card that it tends to come out much quicker.   I would like to ask one of
> the "geniuses" in poker math to monitor this and report their findings. I know
> several people who have quit this site screaming "foul", and I have quit the
> site for the last time today. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this
> subject
> that go deeper than just "i lost with aces " I do not believe that everyone
> who
> plays at Poker Stars has the same chance of success. And just so you dont
> think
> that I am another idiot screamin "foul:" cuz I got broke . I made 360 dollars
> in
> the 2 week time frame mentioned , and believe that I should have won more.
> PLEASE REPLY TY



_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Mav2000]

So your saying that to determine whether a deck of 52 cards is shuffled and
dealt in a random fashion without bias would require a million trials?  that
seems  a bit excessive to me.  I'm not a statistician but perhaps you are.  Can
you tell how you arrived at that conclusion (from a mathematical standpoint) ? 
thanks.

On Oct 25 2005 12:33 AM, Blackize wrote:

> You played for 2 weeks on poker stars. The most hands you could have possibly
> logged would be roughly 20000. That would be if you played poker just about
> all
> day every day. 20000 hands is not the long run. You cannot draw conclusions
> about the bias of a site after 20000 hands. Yet you want us to put stock in
> your
> observations over 2 weeks that the best hand(preflop) doesn't win often enough
> at poker stars.
>
> Come back when you hit 1 million hands and maybe then you can claim the site
> has
> a bias. As for now your post is meaningless, it has been discussed a million
> times before, and youre a dick. Try running a search on "is rigged" as the
> subject line. You will find that many other supposed experts such as yourself
> have based judgements of a site on a few hands, only to be upset when those of
> us with 100s of thousands of hands logged say that there is no bias that it is
> not rigged.
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 3:26 AM, doggystyle wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 2:14 AM, Blackize wrote:
> >
> > > Yep. Your two weeks of play at a site sure tells the whole story about
> > > whether
> > > or not all players are treated fairly.
> > >
> > > On Oct 25 2005 3:04 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > how do people as lame as you ever acquire enough money to afford a computer?
> > narrow minded and ignorant and incapable of quantitative thinking is a
> > terrible
> > way to go thru life   but GL
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in
> > > > > > multi
> > > > > > table
> > > > > > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in
> > > > > > poker, and
> > > > > > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is
> > > > > > mind
> > > > > > boggling.
> > > > >
> > > > > well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've
> > > > > learned
> > > > > that
> > > > > poker isn't about long term results....
> > > >
> > > > of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com

[awk]

Obviously a larger data set is preferred to a smaller one.

On Oct 25 2005 12:56 AM, Mav2000 wrote:

> So your saying that to determine whether a deck of 52 cards is shuffled and
> dealt in a random fashion without bias would require a million trials?  that
> seems  a bit excessive to me.  I'm not a statistician but perhaps you are. 
> Can
> you tell how you arrived at that conclusion (from a mathematical standpoint)
> ? 
> thanks.
>
> On Oct 25 2005 12:33 AM, Blackize wrote:
>
> > You played for 2 weeks on poker stars. The most hands you could have
> > possibly
> > logged would be roughly 20000. That would be if you played poker just about
> > all
> > day every day. 20000 hands is not the long run. You cannot draw conclusions
> > about the bias of a site after 20000 hands. Yet you want us to put stock in
> > your
> > observations over 2 weeks that the best hand(preflop) doesn't win often
> > enough
> > at poker stars.
> >
> > Come back when you hit 1 million hands and maybe then you can claim the site
> > has
> > a bias. As for now your post is meaningless, it has been discussed a million
> > times before, and youre a dick. Try running a search on "is rigged" as the
> > subject line. You will find that many other supposed experts such as
> > yourself
> > have based judgements of a site on a few hands, only to be upset when those
> > of
> > us with 100s of thousands of hands logged say that there is no bias that it
> > is
> > not rigged.
> >
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 3:26 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 25 2005 2:14 AM, Blackize wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yep. Your two weeks of play at a site sure tells the whole story about
> > > > whether
> > > > or not all players are treated fairly.
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 25 2005 3:04 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > how do people as lame as you ever acquire enough money to afford a
> > > computer?
> > > narrow minded and ignorant and incapable of quantitative thinking is a
> > > terrible
> > > way to go thru life   but GL
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in
> > > > > > > multi
> > > > > > > table
> > > > > > > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > poker, and
> > > > > > > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is
> > > > > > > mind
> > > > > > > boggling.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've
> > > > > > learned
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > poker isn't about long term results....
> > > > >
> > > > > of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[doggystyle]

On Oct 25 2005 2:33 AM, Blackize wrote:

> You played for 2 weeks on poker stars. The most hands you could have possibly
> logged would be roughly 20000. That would be if you played poker just about
> all
> day every day. 20000 hands is not the long run. You cannot draw conclusions
> about the bias of a site after 20000 hands. Yet you want us to put stock in
> your

2 points meatwhistle- i never claimed to be an expert , and when i when i smell
a gas leak . I dont wait around for the explosion to know there may be trouble
> observations over 2 weeks that the best hand(preflop) doesn't win often enough
> at poker stars.
>
> Come back when you hit 1 million hands and maybe then you can claim the site
> has
> a bias. As for now your post is meaningless, it has been discussed a million
> times before, and youre a dick. Try running a search on "is rigged" as the
> subject line. You will find that many other supposed experts such as yourself
> have based judgements of a site on a few hands, only to be upset when those of
> us with 100s of thousands of hands logged say that there is no bias that it is
> not rigged.
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 3:26 AM, doggystyle wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 2:14 AM, Blackize wrote:
> >
> > > Yep. Your two weeks of play at a site sure tells the whole story about
> > > whether
> > > or not all players are treated fairly.
> > >
> > > On Oct 25 2005 3:04 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > how do people as lame as you ever acquire enough money to afford a computer?
> > narrow minded and ignorant and incapable of quantitative thinking is a
> > terrible
> > way to go thru life   but GL
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 25 2005 1:59 AM, Kintantee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >

2 points meatwhistle- i never claimed to be an expert , and when  i smell a gas
leak . I dont wait around for the explosion to know there may be trouble

> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 25 2005 2:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in
> > > > > > multi
> > > > > > table
> > > > > > tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in
> > > > > > poker, and
> > > > > > played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is
> > > > > > mind
> > > > > > boggling.
> > > > >
> > > > > well, it's nice to see that after 25 years of "experience", you've
> > > > > learned
> > > > > that
> > > > > poker isn't about long term results....
> > > >
> > > > of course it is moron - thats what poker is all about
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[da pickle]

"arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130223750$648983@recpoker.com...
>
>
>
> On Oct 24 2005 11:46 PM, Goran wrote:
>
>> Unless you can come up with evidence that online poker is rigged, you
>> have
>> no options. Speculation will not get you far. Believe me, I work in the
>> legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
>> massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
>> suit here.
>> I doubt they would risk that.

> You are so full of crap for so many different reasons it is almost funny!.
> Next time buy a clue first.

Arlo, you are responding to a new troll and a responder to a new troll
without a clue. Don't waste your valuable "up" time on these children.

[Goran]

I'm sorry. You're a professional player who knows about the legal system
than most people. Not to mention, someone who has bought plenty of clues.
Amazing how this game brings out the cavemen in most.
Write a letter to poker stars and accuse them of rigging online poker.
Otherwise, I'll give you a clue for free.


--
The contents of this email and any attachments are strictly confidential and
intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). If you
are not the addressee(s) you are not authorised to and must not disclose,
copy, distribute, or retain this message without my authority. Any attempt
to do so will result in legal action.
"arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130223750$648983@recpoker.com...
>
>
>
> On Oct 24 2005 11:46 PM, Goran wrote:
>
>> Unless you can come up with evidence that online poker is rigged, you
>> have
>> no options. Speculation will not get you far. Believe me, I work in the
>> legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
>> massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
>> suit here.
>> I doubt they would risk that.
> You are so full of crap for so many different reasons it is almost funny!.
> Next time buy a clue first.
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

A troll???
Me???
I'm surrounded by them in this NG!


--
The contents of this email and any attachments are strictly confidential and
intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). If you
are not the addressee(s) you are not authorised to and must not disclose,
copy, distribute, or retain this message without my authority. Any attempt
to do so will result in legal action.
"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cvednWkBJNrVjsPeRVn_vQ@giganews.com...
> "arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1130223750$648983@recpoker.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 24 2005 11:46 PM, Goran wrote:
>>
>>> Unless you can come up with evidence that online poker is rigged, you
>>> have
>>> no options. Speculation will not get you far. Believe me, I work in the
>>> legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
>>> massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
>>> suit here.
>>> I doubt they would risk that.
>
>> You are so full of crap for so many different reasons it is almost
>> funny!.
>> Next time buy a clue first.
>
> Arlo, you are responding to a new troll and a responder to a new troll
> without a clue. Don't waste your valuable "up" time on these children.
>

[da pickle]

"Goran" <G-Man> wrote in message news:435e175c@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>A troll???
> Me???
> I'm surrounded by them in this NG!
>
>
> --
> The contents of this email and any attachments are strictly confidential
> and intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s).
> If you are not the addressee(s) you are not authorised to and must not
> disclose, copy, distribute, or retain this message without my authority.
> Any attempt to do so will result in legal action.


Top posting is bad enough, but not reading the post to which you respond is
worse. As I indicate in a different post, please "lose" the "email"
signature.

Goran ... what you post to a Usenet newsgroup is NOT an "email." I know
that you work "in the legal profession" so you likely have your cute little
"confidential" signature file when you send emails at the office, but it is
really tedious for you to include your email signature when you are posting
to a newsgroup. I know that you are going to be angry with me (and the
others that have attempted to point this out to you) but we are really
trying to assist you in this matter. Please, eliminate this from your
posts. (I do not know if "authorised" is some foreign spelling of
"authorized" or not, but if that is the way they spell the word at your
office, you might check their email programming as well. You also have a
bunch of split infinitives, but that is not so much of a sin these days.)

[garycarson]

Mav2000 wrote:
> So your saying that to determine whether a deck of 52 cards is shuffled and
> dealt in a random fashion without bias would require a million trials? that
> seems a bit excessive to me. I'm not a statistician but perhaps you are.

I am.

Can
> you tell how you arrived at that conclusion (from a mathematical standpoint) ?
> thanks.

He's thinking about how many trials it would take to conclude with 95%
confidence that you have an EV over zero. It would take that big of a
sample because the probably EV is going to be very close to zero if
it's over zero and the variance would be very large compared to the
mean. If you do Baysian estimates with a prior that suggests you're
probably a loser (which has been suggested by some to be the right
approach to this sitiuation) you might need an even larger sample.

To determine whether a shuffle is random you won't need that large a
sample, but for someone who isn't a statistician probably no sample
size would be enough because you wouldn't be getting a random sample
(many outcomes will not be observed) and you won't know how to compute
the expected so that you'll have something to compare the obserbed to.

I think it was Steve Brecher, an rgp'er who is competent to do it, who
did do some extensive testing of randomness and was unable to find any
non-random evidence. His experimental design was solid. He reported
the results here on rgp a while back.

by the way, if it's a loose game then the most probable outcome is that
the pot will be won by a longshot draw. If you don't understand why
that's true then you really have nothing to say about the subject.


Gary Carson
www.garycarson.com

[Goran]

In Australia, which is where I live, we spell it "Authorise".
So in future, I'll make a point to delete the sig. I didn't know it
offended so many people.
The addressee in this case is the entire ng, so don't worry, I wont sue
anyone.


"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:L_-dnWINJ_o8hsPeRVn_vA@giganews.com...
> "Goran" <G-Man> wrote in message news:435e175c@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>A troll???
>> Me???
>> I'm surrounded by them in this NG!
>>
>>
>> --
>> The contents of this email and any attachments are strictly confidential
>> and intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s).
>> If you are not the addressee(s) you are not authorised to and must not
>> disclose, copy, distribute, or retain this message without my authority.
>> Any attempt to do so will result in legal action.
>
>
> Top posting is bad enough, but not reading the post to which you respond
> is worse. As I indicate in a different post, please "lose" the "email"
> signature.
>
> Goran ... what you post to a Usenet newsgroup is NOT an "email." I know
> that you work "in the legal profession" so you likely have your cute
> little
> "confidential" signature file when you send emails at the office, but it
> is
> really tedious for you to include your email signature when you are
> posting
> to a newsgroup. I know that you are going to be angry with me (and the
> others that have attempted to point this out to you) but we are really
> trying to assist you in this matter. Please, eliminate this from your
> posts. (I do not know if "authorised" is some foreign spelling of
> "authorized" or not, but if that is the way they spell the word at your
> office, you might check their email programming as well. You also have a
> bunch of split infinitives, but that is not so much of a sin these days.)
>
>

[arlo payne]

On Oct 25 2005 4:27 AM, Goran wrote:

> I'm sorry. You're a professional player who knows about the legal system
> than most people. Not to mention, someone who has bought plenty of clues.
> Amazing how this game brings out the cavemen in most.
> Write a letter to poker stars and accuse them of rigging online poker.
> Otherwise, I'll give you a clue for free.

I said notning about games being rigged.
What I said (The short version) is you have your head up your ass and you have
no idea what you are talking about.
Now FUCKOFF and yes I said fuck!
You know nothing turd.  It is near impossible to bring legal action against any
offshore site.  So don't give me this crap about how you know the law.  I
promise you I have spent more time in the courts and dealing with law firms than
you ever will.

_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[arlo payne]

On Oct 25 2005 4:27 AM, Goran wrote:

> I'm sorry. You're a professional player who knows about the legal system
> than most people. Not to mention, someone who has bought plenty of clues.
> Amazing how this game brings out the cavemen in most.
> Write a letter to poker stars and accuse them of rigging online poker.
> Otherwise, I'll give you a clue for free.

AND ONE MORE THING!
You made it pretty clear you can not read!

_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[da pickle]

"Goran" <G-Man> wrote in message news:435e2030$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> In Australia, which is where I live, we spell it "Authorise".
> So in future, I'll make a point to delete the sig. I didn't know it
> offended so many people.
> The addressee in this case is the entire ng, so don't worry, I wont sue
> anyone.


Thank you. And there is no "addressee" ... what you post is not an email.
Now, we address the top posting thing. Please consider cutting those
portions of a post that you wish to ignore and post below. If there are
numerous posts and replies, it is difficult to follow the thread when some
folks put their two cents at the top.

I am not worried (nor is anyone else) about being sued because we might
"leak" what you post. That part is more than a little silly.

[Goran]

"arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130242800$649088@recpoker.com...
>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 4:27 AM, Goran wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry. You're a professional player who knows about the legal system
>> than most people. Not to mention, someone who has bought plenty of clues.
>> Amazing how this game brings out the cavemen in most.
>> Write a letter to poker stars and accuse them of rigging online poker.
>> Otherwise, I'll give you a clue for free.
>
> I said notning about games being rigged.
> What I said (The short version) is you have your head up your ass and you
> have
> no idea what you are talking about.
> Now FUCKOFF and yes I said fuck!

Now I'm offended

> You know nothing turd. It is near impossible to bring legal action against
> any
> offshore site. So don't give me this crap about how you know the law. I
> promise you I have spent more time in the courts and dealing with law
> firms than
> you ever will.


LOL. Somehow, I'm not surprised.



>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

"arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130242854$649090@recpoker.com...
>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 4:27 AM, Goran wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry. You're a professional player who knows about the legal system
>> than most people. Not to mention, someone who has bought plenty of clues.
>> Amazing how this game brings out the cavemen in most.
>> Write a letter to poker stars and accuse them of rigging online poker.
>> Otherwise, I'll give you a clue for free.
>
> AND ONE MORE THING!
> You made it pretty clear you can not read!

Owww
That hit the nerve

>
> _______________________________________________________________
> The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

> I said notning about games being rigged.
> What I said (The short version) is you have your head up your ass and you
> have
> no idea what you are talking about.
> Now FUCKOFF and yes I said fuck!
> You know nothing turd. It is near impossible to bring legal action against
> any
> offshore site. So don't give me this crap about how you know the law. I
> promise you I have spent more time in the courts and dealing with law
> firms than
> you ever will.
>
>
And one more thing...it's spelt NOTHING. Not NOTNING
_______________________________________________________________
> Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[arlo payne]

On Oct 25 2005 5:30 AM, Goran wrote:

>some bullshit...
Welcome to my kilfilter you moron!

_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

"arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130243751$649108@recpoker.com...
>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 5:30 AM, Goran wrote:
>
>>some bullshit...
> Welcome to my kilfilter you moron!

Moron???
*shiver*

>
> _______________________________________________________________
> * New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

"arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130243751$649108@recpoker.com...
>
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 5:30 AM, Goran wrote:
>
>>some bullshit...
> Welcome to my kilfilter you moron!

Killfilter has 2 L's in it.


>
> _______________________________________________________________
> * New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com

[GrouchySmurf1002]

On Oct 25 2005 8:40 AM, Goran wrote:

> "arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1130243751$649108@recpoker.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 25 2005 5:30 AM, Goran wrote:
> >
> >>some bullshit...
> > Welcome to my kilfilter you moron!
>
> Killfilter has 2 L's in it.


No it doesn't. It has 3.

-------- 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com

[ChrisBrown]

On Oct 25 2005 1:37 AM, doggystyle wrote:

> I have spent the last 10-14 days trying to grind the small buy in multi table
> tournies at Poker Stars  5 tables , and 20 tables. I have worked in poker ,
and
> played for 25 years, and what I have seen in the last 2 weeks is mind
boggling.I
> am by no means an "expert" at the math in poker , but I do understand it
TIME
> AFTER TIME AFTER TIME I see "trick shots" in all-in situations. As paranoid
as
> it may sound to some , I do not believe that all players , in all situations
are
> being treated fairly , and honestly. I recently got an advertisement from a
> start up site that refers to a program that penalizes winners or better
players
> I am aware that weird things happen in poker and these are the ones that
people
> tend to remember. I have noticed the long lapse time in between cards at
Poker
> Stars, and I have also noticed that when a Player is drawing dead before the
> last card that it tends to come out much quicker.   I would like to ask one
of
> the "geniuses" in poker math to monitor this and report their findings.

I have a masters degree in applied math. I will do this for $75/hr,
please respond if you are interested.
___________________________________
I can drink a whole Henessey fifth
Some call that a problem but I call it a gift

______________________________________________________________________ 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

[Goran]

"GrouchySmurf1002" <a1648@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:1cn133x09c.ln2@recgroups.com...
> On Oct 25 2005 8:40 AM, Goran wrote:
>
>> "arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1130243751$649108@recpoker.com...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Oct 25 2005 5:30 AM, Goran wrote:
>> >
>> >>some bullshit...
>> > Welcome to my kilfilter you moron!
>>
>> Killfilter has 2 L's in it.
>
>
> No it doesn't. It has 3.
So it does...I stand corrected


>
> --------
> looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
>
>

[da pickle]

"ChrisBrown" <

> I have a masters degree in applied math. I will do this for $75/hr,
> please respond if you are interested.

Charge $175.

[ChrisBrown]

On Oct 25 2005 8:49 AM, da pickle wrote:

> "ChrisBrown" <
>
> > I have a masters degree in applied math. I will do this for $75/hr,
> > please respond if you are interested.
>
> Charge $175.

i could charge 1.75 and this guy wouldn't respond.
___________________________________
I can drink a whole Henessey fifth
Some call that a problem but I call it a gift

________________________________________________________________________ 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

[Peg Smith]

"Goran" <G-Man> wrote:

>Believe me, I work in the
>legal profession and if you could prove it, you could summons them on
>massive fraud charges and we're talking about a multi million dollar law
>suit here.

LOL. I don't know which is funnier, that or your sig.

Peg

[Bill's Dead]

"Goran" <G-Man> wrote in message news:435e3063$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>
> "GrouchySmurf1002" <a1648@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1cn133x09c.ln2@recgroups.com...
>> On Oct 25 2005 8:40 AM, Goran wrote:
>>
>>> "arlo payne" <arlo_payne@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1130243751$649108@recpoker.com...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Oct 25 2005 5:30 AM, Goran wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>some bullshit...
>>> > Welcome to my kilfilter you moron!
>>>
>>> Killfilter has 2 L's in it.
>>
>>
>> No it doesn't. It has 3.
> So it does...I stand corrected
>
>
No you're not. You're sitting.

[Mav2000]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for the info, I also checked out your site, very interesting and
informative. 

Clearly the intricacies of statistical analysis are best left to the
statisticians (like yourself) but it just seems there must be some way to come
up with a practical test.  If you and I bet on the outcome of a tossed coin with
you winning every time its heads, I would probably curse my bad luck if you won
80% of the first ten flips.  If you won 80% of the first 100, i would become
suspicious.  80% of the first 1000? I think even you would begin to doubt the
fairness, though the sample size might not be statistically valid to question
the randomness of the flip.

As to your final point about the longshot draw being most likely to win in a
loose game, it struck me as odd at first.  how could a longshot (by definition,
an unlikely outcome) be the most likely outcome?  I assume it is because in a
loose game, there would be multiple longshots still in whose total probability
of success (before the river) would be > .5 , therefore ONE of them would be
most likely to win.

On Oct 25 2005 5:02 AM, garycarson wrote:

> Mav2000 wrote:
> > So your saying that to determine whether a deck of 52 cards is shuffled and
> > dealt in a random fashion without bias would require a million trials? that
> > seems a bit excessive to me. I'm not a statistician but perhaps you are.
>
> I am.
>
> Can
> > you tell how you arrived at that conclusion (from a mathematical standpoint)
> > ?
> > thanks.
>
> He's thinking about how many trials it would take to conclude with 95%
> confidence that you have an EV over zero. It would take that big of a
> sample because the probably EV is going to be very close to zero if
> it's over zero and the variance would be very large compared to the
> mean. If you do Baysian estimates with a prior that suggests you're
> probably a loser (which has been suggested by some to be the right
> approach to this sitiuation) you might need an even larger sample.
>
> To determine whether a shuffle is random you won't need that large a
> sample, but for someone who isn't a statistician probably no sample
> size would be enough because you wouldn't be getting a random sample
> (many outcomes will not be observed) and you won't know how to compute
> the expected so that you'll have something to compare the obserbed to.
>
> I think it was Steve Brecher, an rgp'er who is competent to do it, who
> did do some extensive testing of randomness and was unable to find any
> non-random evidence. His experimental design was solid. He reported
> the results here on rgp a while back.
>
> by the way, if it's a loose game then the most probable outcome is that
> the pot will be won by a longshot draw. If you don't understand why
> that's true then you really have nothing to say about the subject.
>
>
> Gary Carson
> http://www.garycarson.com/



_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Michael Sullivan]

Mav2000 <43081041@recpoker.com> wrote:

> Clearly the intricacies of statistical analysis are best left to the
> statisticians (like yourself) but it just seems there must be some way to
> come up with a practical test. If you and I bet on the outcome of a
> tossed coin with you winning every time its heads, I would probably curse
> my bad luck if you won 80% of the first ten flips. If you won 80% of the
> first 100, i would become suspicious. 80% of the first 1000? I think even
> you would begin to doubt the fairness, though the sample size might not be
> statistically valid to question the randomness of the flip.

There is a simple practical test. You derive the standard deviation and
the expected value from the principles of the random proposition, then
use those to calculate the likelihood of results in specific intervals.

You don't need to be a statistician to learn this stuff. You don't
even need to take a college level stats course. You just need to be
really comfortable with high school math and maybe a little calculus. If
so -- google around for those terms and a sigma table and you should be
able to come up with the necessary information to do the analysis
yourself. That's how I learned a bunch of this. It's really amazing
how much good information is available on the web these days.


Michael