![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
Sorry Edgar. You are indeed a courteous person and I apologize for charaterizing you as "just another bitter gambler". I am also sure your are a very serious player, and probably a very formidable opponent at that.Again, my apologies for the tone of my letters on this and the thread. Believe me- I have been there at Paradise, and some of the bad beats I've taken there are unbelievable. I have to maintain, however, that I do not know that the advantage Paradise might gain from any sort of corrupt system would be worth their investment. As I said before, it just doesn't seem economically feasible. It would probably cost them a lot of extra money to have such a system in place, and it seems to me that they are raking in the cash without taking that risk. I must say, for months I struggled on Paradise- my bankroll went up and down and I never seemed to get anything acomplished. Then, I changed my play- actually my whole philosophy on the game, and went down to smaller limits. Maybe the reason for my successful change was that I moved to short-handed games at lower limits than I'd normally play- this way, I could afford to play much looser and more aggressively- and that pays off at Paradise Poker, I'll definitely give you that. I guess my whole philosophy might be "if you can't beat 'em, make it look like you are joining 'em." Incidentally, now when I play in my home game, I find the game boring and slow- the only reason I play is for the laughs and the socialization. Paradise Poker has become a relatively easy way for me to make a little money at a time, and because I can play many more hands and generally feel that on average I play them better than my opponents, I probably have a better expected value on Paradise than I do in many live games. Anyway, I don't have any casinos near my hometown, so Paradise Poker is something I am glad to be able to access. I can understand why people would subscribe to the cashout theory, but in my experience it doesn't always bring the bad beats, and when they start coming now, I get the hell out of dodge for a while!
I,ve been cashing out for the second time in 6 months. Every time i had save 50% of the Bank. And every time i got brooke fast. Very fast. The last time i had 1500$ and cashed 800, and it took 3 weeeks to get broke again but it took 3 months to win that amount. And i had only played 2-4 and 30$tournaments that i earned the money in. Please how, and why does this happends!
Mainly you just play badly. Any other reasons, like the fact that collusion is rampant and PP is not above cheating you for a little extra dough, is merely the luck of the draw.
they level the playing field by using software semilar to wilson. they change your profile so that nobody get rich. poor players feel like champs and everyone keeps playing for the maximum lengt of time. the cardroom is full and the rake keeps coming.
Can't agree more. I have been really unfortunate lately at Paradise. I admit losing some due to tilt, but come on. Got up 3000K after some hard work and many hours of sweat. Then, the cards run cold. Very cold! I flop a set twice. Lose both. I get AA twice in a row lose both. I keep getting beat by trash. To me it looked like just bad playing at first (some hands by me, and some hands by the opponents), but now I am not so sure any more.
You might say I am a whiner. I don't really care. I think paradise poker is rigged.
To people who can not understand why they would rig it. *LOL* If the bad players get broke all the time, then who will hang around? I strongly believe they mess with the distribution of hole cards.
We are many who say this. But why do we keep returning to Paradise night after night? Lets all put them out of business. Lets make our own "rig free" site, or go to some other site.
Comments wanted.
Agron
If you think they are cheating, cash out and switch. (Just like you would do if you lived in Las Vegas and thought the B&M poker room was cheating you).
There are many other sites that will appreciate your business. If you can't stand other site's software, wait a few months. New sites are coming online monthly with comparable if not better software than Paradise. Its just a matter of time.
I play with MP daily.....he told you where he is and you what..........chickened out.......cybercoward.
Sorry, I've been busy underpinning my mobile home for the last few days. When I am finished I will see if my Granny will lend me enough to play.
Tom:
"It is not a matter of what I prefer, but a matter of what is available."
17 million hands are available between more than 60,000 Paradise clients. Any competitor or potential competitor or syndicate of same could hire players to play thousands of hours, order every hand history, do a simple (or endlessly complex!) probability analysis of the distribution of hole cards, have the results verfied by an independent audit, and publish the proof in "don't be a sucker, play here instead" ads in Card Player or on internet posts and ad banners. Or they could just acquire the millions of hand histories lodged in thousands of computors like mine.
Why is this unavailable and why wouldn't it be proof? How could it be persuasively refuted if it were true? Why would Paradise make this stuff available if it proved they cheated? Why wouldn't the possiblity of getting caught and earning nothing deter them into just making millions off of a straight game? If all the dozen or so sites don't have to cheat, why doesn't competition solve the problem (by encouraging sites to refrain from cheating in the first place if the sites with the greatest relaiblity are destined to get the most customers)? Why do 99% of the "cheating" posts fail to consider these elementary questions but rely on bad beats, bad streaks and idle speculation about human corruptibility? Why are so many of the pro-cheating posters (not you) so obviously nuts? Everything points in one direction.
What do you mean, "the indentical independent testimony of so many knowledgeable players?" How are the players you mention "independent" of their self-interest in rationalizing their losses? As far as "knowledgeable players" that have contended something's wrong, you can't name one who's "knowledgeablity" is based on anything other than their own self-assessment. (And often a curiously qualified one at that, as in "I do ok" playing live, or "I hold my own," the familiar refrains of the break-even and clueless).
Don't bring Ed Hill into this. Although he's a truly knowledgeable player and counts for a lot, you're ignoring the fact that he disagrees with you. Both of you think there's collusion, and I don't disagree with that, although I haven't seen any (but wouldn't expect to if it were done well), and can't reconcile the idea of widespread collusion with my own results, although they're more weighted with lower than middle limits.
I'm sorry, but although I suspect you mean well, you're not doing Ed any favors by trying to adorn his earnest argument with weak ones.
Your pro online bias is sickening.. Can I interest you in a very fair game of 3 card monty?
i can't understand why highlands doesn't have more games either.their software is running as good as any of the poker sites now,and though they aren't making much money[doesn't seem to be]they give away by far the most perks.they have a tournament the 1st tuesday of each month where they GIVE AWAY $5,350.00.The 100 players who played the most hands the previous month are allowed to participate.They have a bad beat hold-em jackpot that now stans at near $54,000.00 and will grow every day till it's hit.they pay the fed-ex charge on all cashouts over $300.00,and you will get your check the next day.Their customer support is the best,very friendly,and always ready to help with any problem or questions a customer may have.I play their every day,and while there are times I may have to wait a short time to get the right limit I want to play,it's well worth it and I think in a very short time other people will realize this and their site will grow into one of the most popular online.One more thing,I love playing in the same game with Doyle"texas dolly"Brunson.He talks it up pretty good and really isn't hard to beat at all[though i imagine he's just having fun,and may not be playing his toughest at 15-30,or 20-40].I am not a shill for highlands,just like playing there,and hope this little post will encourage others to do so also.SEE YOU THERE.
I think it is a marketing/business question. Paradise has extensive word of mouth on its side, it has an easy name and hence an easy address and markets itself pretty well. Highlands on the other hand, you can't find unless you know exactly what the Web address is. If you haven't visited the site or seen an ad (they are rare), how will you figure out that 'Highlands' is a poker site?
Anyway, what I think happens is that players tend to end up, because of marketing and word-of-mouth, at Paradise. Somewhat fewer for the same reason land at Planet. And if they are happy at these sites (especially Paradise, where despite the stench of collusion, etc. the software is fast and friendly)why would they go to Highlands (or another site) where the games are tight and limited? If they aren't happy at Paradise they are usually just not happy with online poker in general, for all the reasons that are frequently posted. So why go to yet another site where the games are fewer and they are faced with the same unanswered questions?
Because of its long time up and running, and because it has decent customer service and good marketing, Planet will continue to stay in business. Paradise is the big gorilla though and until another site commits massive dollars to advertising it will remain so.
n/t
Ditto on everything you SAID!
Hand #1: I would not have capped it, and I would have called a bet on the river.
Hand #2: I would not have called the flop. You know that, so I congratulate you on your runner runner perfect royal flush.
Derrick
Take a beat give a beat...point being?
Yesterday I played in a Paradise 20 dollar buy in tourney. I ended in 3rd place. Seat number 3 was the first to exit the tourney. Seat number 3 raised before the flop a total of 6 or 7 times in his/her short existence. With the exception of one time, every other time that seat 3 raised, seat 4 reraised. Seat 4 ended up having about 2500 in t-chips very early on. Second chip leader had about 900. It's too big of a coincidence. I understand that seat 4 may of played with seat 3 before and had a beat and position on this player. It still seemed awfully fishy.
Comments welcomed
Post hand histories.
I am the worlds' greatest poker player.
Comments welcome.
Adam.
Adam:
You may be now, but you will soon be dethroned!!!
Your buddy
I would love to play you heads up, just let me know when and I'm there !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think that there is a fair bit of collusion in PP. But if you are a solid player it may infact work in your favour. Okay, Tourneys are a bit different, but if you are playing premium hands and playing a solid game, you can take stacks of colluded players as they are caught up in loose agressive raising.
Running a best hand play is the only way this can work in a tournie. But you still have to beat the other players. I agree this may help both players make the money when you get down to 4 or 5 players, but you have to get there first.
Really it hardly seems worth it, considering how infrequently such extreme examples will arise. And im far from convinced that raising with 44 is good idea 4 handed anyway. If you get called and most of the time you will, you are a small favourite against 2 overcards, and a massive underdog to a better pair. You want to avoid action at this stage, unless you are sure you can buy it, or you have the best of it after the flop.
I posted "Cut it out you guys!" when several regulars were picking on a hopeless idiot (my player notes listed the fellow as "LCS IEHTR": loose calling station, in every hand to river). Of course he was sucking out on them, for awhile on a streak. I just stay patient with these types and wait for the right time to pounce, and I wanted him in the game. He was down nearly $60 in a .5/1.00 stud game!!
One player reponded to my post "You're right," and they stopped it for awhile. He went on another streak and a couple of the other players started in on him again. This time he tightened up, then left after a short while. I proceeded to lecture the teachers on keeping quiet. I've done this a couple of times--hopefully everyone at the table will remember and it will sink in.
Marilyn P.
If players X and Y tell player Z he is a hopeless idiot and teach him to play better, so that they suffer less horrendous beatings on the river etc, I smile. Why? Because I know players X and Y are not real poker players. Not only will I have player Z's stack, player X and Y will soon have there stack coming my way. Poker players do not encourage others to play better. Any player that does is a complete and utter baboon. I welcome these players at my table.
I agree that usually these teachers are weak at poker, in this particular case they had just read a book or something... not too much experience, but reasonably book smart.
I still don't want them to hack on the fish. His money was the easiest to get at at the table, you just had to hope he didn't get lucky on you. The last think I needed was for him to take offense to these guys, and show us that he can fold.
I'll take the money from whoever will give it, but I still think you should always take the path of least resistance.
I didn't know the proper way to communicate this to the players at the table without alerting the fish. He was actually playing these guys... He was saying stuff like what is quads? etc. I think he may have actually been slumming at my meager limits, but whatever... I'll take that money too.
Derrick
one effective way to alert teachers is to ask if you can contact them for lessons.
even if they don't get it, now they're more interested in listening to your flattery than reciting odds to the fish.
your mileage may vary.
the club
I like this approach.
Thanks.
Derrick
Had an interesting scenario a couple of weeks ago. Loose, passive, low-limit Omaha-8 game. I'm in a plum seat with a bad player two to my left who was betting out with anything. When I made a hand, I was (virtually) always able to check-raise and trap all the callers in between.
Unfortunately, he starts running out of money, and I get into a situation where I'm heads-up with him. I think he had 4-5 big bets left, and I've never played with him before, so I don't know if he's going to rebuy.
I've got a big hand (nut-nut or something close to it) and when I bet into him, he raises. My question is this: This guy is making me a lot of money by playing poorly and allowing me to trap many people by virtue of his constant betting...is it correct to just call, and leave him in the game? (I called, scooped, and was able to benefit in one more pot before he busted out and left the game.)
Thoughts?
You never know when an online player will leave a game. He might have left with a few dollars after you scooped. In this case, I would have tried to extract the maximum.
It might be a slightly different situation if you play against this guy every day and want him to remember you as a good guy to play with.
You and I are partners. You are in the big blind and we are playing four handed. I am one off the button, in other words UTG. I pick up A5s or 44, should I raise it? Well, it depends on what you have: 1. If your partner has nothing, yes, of course raise it and go after the blinds. Remember, you already know that the big blind is folding. 2. Your partner has KK. Well, now you should fold. This puts the guy on the button in the "steal position". Remember, he really wasn't supposed to be there, you should have raised with my hand. Now, by me folding I have run him right into your Kings.
This can be expanded on into a complete strategy, you don't need to be dumping chips to your partner. This kind of strategy will get past all redflagging software.
Your scenario makes sense... what it kind of is is playing best hand. You aren't necessarily dumping chips to your partner, but you can fold the worst of 2 hands. Also, you never run into each other.
But, it isn't what Rounder07 saw in his tournament, which was a far less lucrative form of CHEATING.
Derrick
I agree that two or more players could collude in such a manner. However, I also believe it would be a relatively simple matter to detect such behavior.
William
The highlands bad beat just went -54000 (approx)The winner got $27000.Unreal.I was fortunate to be playing at the table.After all the crap with pokerspot its nice to see something good.
yea,well i had just quit the game less than 30 minutes before it got hit.lucky you,unlucky me.well at least today is the 1st day of qualifying hands for the new month of may,and i'll be sure to be one of the 100 players who play play the most hands at HIGHLANDS this month,so as to have a shot in their $5,000.00 plus free roll tournament each month.the jackpot isn't 54,000.00 any more,but they did start it at over $11,000.00 after the 54k was hit last nite.
have you ever noticed how a new player posting the blind seems to be a winner the first hand they get,,this is true about 30% of the time and i am a little cautious when i see a new player join the table ,i think part is the draw other times its just that they are so ready to play that they call it all the way,any other ideas or have you noticed this ,,
Hi ED I have become a winning player on paradise poker after initially loosing quite a lot. I would like to discuss paradise with you. Hopefully I will be able to enlighten you. A lot of players here will recognise my handle. If You are Interested let me know and I will email you.
Yours Celtic.Tiger
How do find the site that is referred to as RGP?
news:rec.gambling.poker
there is also a link from pokerpages.com under rgp forum
Sure, I would love to hear what you have to say.
Hello spot players, i am pleased to report that the player known as ITS ALL LUCK received payment via bank drsft of $1100, of course i have not been paid as of yet but my hope has been renewed. Later.
Yes,
It's a fact I recived my beautiful bank draft for all of my cashouts after march 15th!!!!! I am thouroughly overjoyed.. I have yet to recive my installment payment as I am one of the 57 being investigated...lol. but $$$ is $$$. I have yet to use any of the money because although it is a check drawn from a bank by a bank it is still a check. So I'll wait a week to see if it clears and let you know. But for now my faith is somewhat restored in pokerspot. ok I'll let yo8u know the check was for $5500 so good luck to everyone I hope you get paid.
I just got in today's mail my first installment payment from Pokerspot. This first installment payment is for $400 (I cashed out $2,000 back in January 2001).
They first emailed me on April 19th saying "the checks in the mail". Twelve days later it's at my house. It's send from Nevis via standard air mail for 90cents. The check is dated April 20th wrapped in a blank white piece of paper.
I feel like this is a good start to everyone eventually getting all of their money that they are due. But only time will tell. Still five more payments to go...
maybe i'm missing something here.seem's like every other post says they're afraid of being cheated at one particular site,and afraid of not getting paid at another one.i've heard of none of nither of these concerns about highlandsclub.with all the great perks they offer,it seems it would make sense to play at that site.they don't always have a lot of games going,but if a few people would just sit there and wait at the game of their choice,it probably wouldn't take but a few days until everyone would have a big choice of games,with no concerns about anything negative.[just concentrate on playing winning poker]
There's nothing wrong with paradise man. It has lots of players, lots of games, and every can get money in and out easily.
Some people complain they thinks its crooked based on a few hands they got beat on, but with 70odd million hands dealt strange things will and do happen. What would paradise have to gain from that anyway? They earn millions off the rake.
Ultimatebet has great software, but no real money games yet.
Mr.Peterson,obviously you didn't read my post thourghly.Why would you come to the conclusion that when i made reference to possible cheating on some online poker sites that i was referring to paradise?Sounds to me like you work for them,because i certainly made no mention af their name.As for ultimatebet's pretty softwaer coming out,who gives a shit.People who play on line poker aren't doing so to look at pretty software,they're doing so to hopefully win and to be confident they won't be cheated and will get paid.This is what you get at Highlands.I don't know,but with all these new sites trying to open[like ultimatebet]there's no way I would send them my money.Seeing Doyle Brunson's picture on the ad of Highlands,makes me feel comfortable.I don't know about these "johnny come lately's"like ultimate bet for one.What you say about some strange hands at paradise out of millions,makes sense to me,but please sir,I never said I thought their was cheating going on at paradise,but it wouldn't shock me if there was going to be at some of these new sites trying to get opened and started.
Does anybody know anyone who has been barred from Planet for their allin use? The players including myself constantly report allin abuse and receive a nice message that they will be investigated but I am not aware of the final result. Just want to know if real action is taken.
Thanks, puravida
My understanding is that the ultimate punishment isn't being banned from the site but having your all in protection removed which is a much worse punishment.
If somebody wants to continue playing without that protection it will cost them money. I don't know of anybody who has had this happen to them and I doubt we'll find out unless Planet publicizes it.
I am thinking about sending Paradise $100 so I can play some .5-1 and 1-2 Hold 'Em. My question is, is this enough money to whether swings at these levels or am I just destined to go broke and keep sending in Franklin after Franklin? Do people who win invest more initially, and when do you decide to cash out, and with what kind of frequency. For example, say I doubled my investment to $200, should I cash out the initial 100 and play risk-free? Would this type of bankroll be better for tourneys or cash games? Any other thoughts on what needs to be considered before I make the move to online (I am at school, and far away from a cardroom).
Jeff
Don't worry about whether the buyin is high enough or not - rather worry whether you can afford to play at a certain level. You can easily lose your $100 investment from simple variation. If you have no more funds to gamble with there is the possibility that you go bust before you even start rolling.
The biggest factor to your online success is the quality of your game, not how much money you start with. Having spent a lot of time on this forum, it appears that a ton of people are losers playing online. You need to play a quality game to be successful. I think the quality of play is much better than others give it great for.
No offense, but given some of your comments it appears you are new to the game. If so, be very careful online. It is extremely easy to play too loose.
The biggest factor to your online success is the quality of your game, not how much money you start with.
This is definitely not true. Depending on your std. dev. you do need a certain number of bets, or you stand a very good chance of going broke. Mason has written about this...
Try this experiment if you don't believe me. Take $10 of your online bankroll (only 10), and play 1-2. If you get lucky you won't go broke. Once you reach $20 play 2-4 etc. See if you can make it to 10-20. In reality you have a much better chance of going broke then you do of making it to 10-20 no matter how good your game is.
The above example is pretty extreme, but it definitely proves my point.
Derrick
Clarification:
Derrick, we are talking about 2 different things.
You are misreading my statement. I am refering to how much you put into Paradise not to the size of your total gambling pool of funds.
It is really unimportant whether I put $100 of my bankroll online or $500 of my bankroll online. The reason being is I can always put more in at any time (unless you play high limits - because of max. deposit issues).
Jeff seemed very concerned with the amount he placed at PP - not his total gambling bankroll. I.E. how much to start with and when to take out. He indicates he has more funds than the original $100.
My point is that the amount you put in to PP will not determine your success (assuming you have access to more funds)- the quality of your play will.
I clearly point out that if you only have $100 you can easily go broke.
This is what I did.
I am a regular poker player and have a good BR and wanted to give online play a shot.
So I made a deposit of 500 bucks. This was enough to play 2 tables of .50 - $1 comfortably.
I only play at a table if I can buy in for 150BB.
Everytime I win 300, I credit my credit card for 100. So 2/3 builds BR and the other 1/3 I get back.
Well, I have won about 2500 so far. I repaid my initial buyin long ago. I haven't made any cashouts yet, though, because I want to have enough in there for when the 5-10 game is particularly juicy.
I would just let your BR grow for a while so that you can afford bigger games. When you have 600 dollars you can play 2 games of 1-2 at once. When you have 1200, you can play 2 games of 2-4 at once.
Remember that if you run bad and lose a chunk of your BR to move down for a while so that you don't wipe out.
Every now and then, cash out for some % of your BR.
Think of it as an investment. The more you spend, the less you have of your investment to make you more money in the future.
Find a balance that you are happy with and good luck online!
Needing 600 to play 2 tables of .50-1? I am guessing it is closer to needing 300 big bets to play with an adequate bankroll at two tables.
Assuming for one table, you need 300 big bets, with two tables at once, why would the bankroll double to 600? If you play one table with double the bet size, then yes the bankroll should double to 600, but with two tables at once, you will still go through the same variance as playing one table, but just in half the time. Each of the two tables are independant, so a negative swing on one table does not imply you'll experience a negative swing on the other table.
If your variance is tied to going on tilt, then yes you'd need more to play two tables, since going on tilt at one table means going on tilt at the other table (unless you are able to go on tilt at one table only, which would be very strange!)
- Johnny
There's no difference as far as bankroll requirements goes between playing two tables and one table. If you play one hour on two tables this is equivalent to playing two hours on one table. All it does is double your play rate.
$600 is a pretty large requirement before sitting 1/2. I feel fine playing 1/2 with $400. It's very unlikely I will lose all of that on a swing, especially if I drop to 50/1 once I reach $100.
Chris
I think if you have a reasonable win rate and std. dev. you can buy in for about 300 BB of whatever limit you want to play at. If you want to play 1-2 buy in for 600. If you fall below 200 BB, fall down a level.
Derrick
Jeff,
You'll know a lot more after a week of play. The same goes for your cash-out questions. Good luck.
Tom D
If you choose a game other than holdem, which has a much larger tendencie for swings than the other games offered. Playing 7 stud, or the hilo split games, rewards players who play well very consistently, and for minimal risk.
50c/1 and 1/2 holdem are treated as a crap shoot by many players. This gives a good player a high EV, but a high Std. Dev. to go with it. Tournies have a lower std. dev, but require more strategy than a ring game. They are very beatable though.
In live games, Stud and Omaha players will experience more swings than Holdem, but this doesn't seem to hold true online. Most 50c/1 and 1/2 players actually play 5/10 or bigger in live games, and often treat 50c/1 games as semi-play money, hence the big swings in holdem.
And i think a $50 buyin is enough for a stud player playing 50c/1 i bought in for $50 and have well over a thousand profits from playing small tournies and stud.
Everyone who has posted on this subject has some good points on Jeff's question. I myself started out with $100 dollars and played .50/1.00. Lost about 3/4 of my bankroll, before I began to turn it around a little bit. I believe that this is a good idea as a buy-in for your initial test run on Paradise for several reasons which have been mentioned above also.
One, as someone aforementioned, .50/1.00 games are wild, it doesn't seem like a lot of money, but it can go very quickly...had a friend a few days ago who bought in for 50, hit a couple of hands, went up to 120, and tilted it all away in about 2 hours...I am fully confident, that if he had more money, it would have been gone also...If you are at a wild .50/1.00 table or 1/2 table which very often happens money can disappear at a truly astonishing rate.
Online at those levels takes the patience and temperament of a saint. Losing with K-K to 2-8 suited can put anyone on tilt, and this kind of thing happens a LOT online(the guy called 2 bets cold with the 2-8 suited btw). I think 100 dollars is the perfect amount for you to get a good idea about online poker. Paradise even has the lovely function of allowing you to send your hand transcripts to yourself. If you're winning great, good for you, if not, after you lose your buy-in re-evaluate by looking at the hands you played...maybe online poker isn't right for you...if you want to make a guaranteed few bucks and hour, i agree with Mr. Peterson, just sit down at .50/1.00 stud, and fold until you pick up Aces, Kings, or queens...
as a response to winning player, the 5-10 game is very juicy at paradise...but I think you are very wise to save up those 250 big bets for when you play it, because even playing good poker, you can lose a whole lot in a very small amount of time...i don't know if i buy that most of collusion at paradise happens at 5-10 and 10-20, but my sampling of time there tends to make me wonder a little...
good luck all, and don't tilt
Peter
Hi there, I have been playing on paradise for the last 2 months and have been running over the games. I've already won 2500 bucks and there is no end in sight.
My question is, do any of you out there pay taxes on these earnings? If so, how do you go about it? Is it really illegal? Can the IRS know about my cashouts online?
It would suck to win 20000 this year, live it up, and then get audited and find out I have to cough up 10000 to pay for back taxes and penalties else go to jail.
Can you play internet poker in jail? I'm guessing not.
Start playing at PokerSpot and you'll have no tax worries.
I pay taxes on my winnings. I report them on form 1040, and losses as itemized deductions.
Do you have to provide any documentation? What would happen, hypothetically speaking, if one were to make no mention of his winnings online? Is it likely that they would ever find out?
I'm having the same problem. I was wondering if the IRS would find out about online winnings. Moreover can I "create" some fictitious losses in real casinos to cancel them out. Does paradise send you a W2? How about planet? thx for any info.
Unless you itemize you cannot deduct your losses. You cannot offset or net them. You must report gross winnings on the front of form 1040 and itemize your losses, to the extent of winnings, on Schedule A. If you use the standard deduction you are screwed, which pleases the government just fine.
You can file Scheduke C and net your gambling wins and losses only if you can define betting activity as a business that has a "reasonable expectation" of profit. This generally means two profitable years in five.
Of course, if you lived within the United Kingdom or most of the rest of the civilized world, there is no taxation of gambling income.
if you lived in uk no gambling taxes .but they sure get you with penty of othere taxes .not much left to gamble with . answer to fist ? .no off shore casino is going to issue 1099 forms withe your winnings .like they do in las vegas and other casinos if you win over a certain amount .as stated you can only take losses if you itemise. unless you have 1099s there is no way anyone can tell wether your in a win situatinn or not .last yr my wife nad wins in vegas of over 4000.00 iwas unable to claim my poker losses against this win .i keep very good records of my play .but will have to pay taxes on any large payout in tounys if reported .as a retired person i do not itemise anymore .so i get stuck either way .
The IRS published guidelins for how to keep documentation on gambling winning and losses. I do not recall the publication number, but I found it by spending a little bit of time searching their website. Neither Planet nor Paradise has ever sent me a W-2G.
I have never been audited, so I do not know how extensively the would investigate the truthfulness of your documentation.
the way i understand it - the only way the IRS "knows" is when they audit you and get to inspect your bank statements. of course, if you are depositing a lot of checks, they'll notice it....and unless you have documentation or records that it is something else, then you may have problems.
don't cheat on taxes, that's how we help the unfortunate, build a military, build the public roads, etc.
Abdulizing the game: Good idea ? Here is a hand played according to what I understand of the Abdul-Ram/Jam-concept in a multi-way-pot ! Good idea ? ----------------------------------------------------- Paradise - $0.50/$1 Hold'em - Seat 10 is the button Seat 1: JCWALTER ($54.50 in chips) Seat 2: Pappa ($22.25 in chips) Seat 3: PJBGH ($53.25 in chips) Seat 4: Peeper ($100.25 in chips) Seat 5: Allen37 ($40.75 in chips) Seat 6: imbigmo ($9.75 in chips) Seat 7: huddd ($35.75 in chips) Seat 8: pokerplayer ($50 in chips) Seat 9: nagual ($20 in chips) Seat 10: little tom ($30 in chips) JCWALTER: Post Small Blind ($0.25) Pappa : Post Big Blind ($0.50) pokerplayer: Post ($0.50) nagual : Post ($0.50) Dealing... Dealt to pokerplayer [ Jh Qh ] (that’s me) PJBGH : Fold Peeper : Call ($0.50) Allen37 : Call ($0.50) imbigmo : Call ($0.50) huddd : Call ($0.50) pokerplayer: Check nagual : Check little tom: Raise ($1) JCWALTER: Fold Pappa : Call ($0.50) Peeper : Call ($0.50) Allen37 : Call ($0.50) imbigmo : Call ($0.50) huddd : Call ($0.50) pokerplayer: Raise ($1) nagual : Call ($1) little tom: Call ($0.50) JCWALTER said, "just kept getting better and better" Pappa : Call ($0.50) Peeper : Call ($0.50) Allen37 : Call ($0.50) imbigmo : Fold huddd : Call ($0.50) *** FLOP *** : [ Kh 5s 2h ] Pappa : Check Peeper : Check Allen37 : Check huddd : Check pokerplayer: Bet ($0.50) nagual : Fold little tom: Call ($0.50) Pappa : Fold Peeper : Raise ($1) Allen37 : Call ($1) huddd : Call ($1) pokerplayer: Raise ($1) little tom: Raise ($1.50) Peeper : Call ($1) Allen37 : Call ($1) huddd : Call ($1) pokerplayer: Call ($0.50) *** TURN *** : [ Kh 5s 2h ] [ 3c ] Peeper : Bet ($1) Allen37 : Fold huddd : Call ($1) pokerplayer: Call ($1) little tom: Call ($1) *** RIVER *** : [ Kh 5s 2h 3c ] [ 2c ] Peeper : Bet ($1) huddd : Fold pokerplayer: Fold little tom: Call ($1) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $26.75 | Rake: $1 Board: [ Kh 5s 2h 3c 2c ] JCWALTER lost $0.25 (folded) Pappa lost $1.50 (folded) PJBGH didn't bet (folded) Peeper bet $5.50, collected $26.75, net +$21.25 (showed hand) [ 5c 5d ] (a full house, fives full of twos) Allen37 lost $3.50 (folded) imbigmo lost $1 (folded) huddd lost $4.50 (folded) pokerplayer lost $4.50 (folded) [ Jh Qh ] (a pair of twos) nagual lost $1.50 (folded) little tom lost $5.50 (showed hand) [ Ah Kd ] (two pair, kings and twos) ----------------------------------------------------- Despite the actual outcome of the hand I think the the Abdul-Ram/Jam-concept make sense !? Or is it a maniac-play ? Should I have played this hand even more aggressive ? Too bad that there is so few multi-way-pot’s even in $0.50/$1 Hold'em on Paradise ! Any comments appreciated !!
I think you played it well.
Pre-flop: your limp re-raise is fine. It 1) disguises your hand next time you have AA or KK and do it, but more importantly is, 2) you make the pot big enough that people become pot-tied and wont get out if you hit your flush.
Flop: with four opponents and 1.9:1 odds on making it by the river you should be raising. The only reason you wouldn't is if you have an opponent you know would not be in a pot that is getting jammed without the nut flush draw.
Turn: you no longer have enough people in to keep jamming. If there is a chance to win the pot right there you could raise, but I don't think that is likely and there is no free card to buy. Callign here is correct in my opinion.
River: oh well, better luck next time. Note that if you had hit here you get paid off in two spots and maybe can sneak in one more raise.
Another benefit of playing the hand this way is that it may appear to your opponents that you are a maniac there to gamble it up. If there is any -ev anywhere here (and I don't think there is, but someone might convince me there was pre-flop) you'll certainly make it up with increased action on later hands.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
I think the key to this hand is that your open-ended straight draw is to the nuts and your flush draw is to the 2nd nuts. Thus anyone with lesser draws will play dearly. Of course if someone has the nut flush you are also in trouble. The key to playing this jamming style IMHO is to do it when you think there are people in the pot who are probably drawing dead. If you are playing a draw that may easily be beaten or even drawing dead it would be wrong to play in this fashion.
;-D
Thanks for your comments - not only on this one but also in general - you have been very helpfull !
'Another benefit of playing the hand this way is that it may appear to your opponents that you are a maniac there to gamble it up.'
Good point !
This is not a maniac play, it is the correct play. The only play that some may question is the limp reraise before the flop. I actually rarely make this play, but I like it none the less. Otherwise a text book hand.
Derrick
;-)
I know that you are supposed to win a BB an hour playing in a casino. So you are suppose to average $20 an hour at 10-20. What about the internet? Since you get nearly three times the hands an hour on the internet than at a casino, should you make 3x a BB, or $60 an hour on 10-20 (not to mention a 5% rake and no tipping dealers)?
No one at 2+2 ever loses online. The most rich millinaire that wins every session is Chris ALgerHis secret to success is to always , always raise with K-10o in late position. If you not winning every single time you play, then you just are a whining loser.
Take away $59 per hour for collusion which is not prevented by the owners of the web site. You should make $1 per hour. Stick to live games.
The 10-20 games on PP are tougher than you will find in real life. You'll need to be pretty good to make even 1 BB/hr.
Chris
I agree
If you can do 1BB an hour I think you are doing good. Some of those PP games are damn tough. Played a couple of 3/6 PP tables last night and I absolutely couldn't believe how good they were. Tight agressive, no fish, and everyone well funded (none of those sweet come in with $30 guys). Played about 5 rounds at each and I don't think I saw any blatantly bad plays before I bolted to easier tables.
Table selection is key
Also, I think Steve Badger says you can make 5 BB an hour playing two tables. However, I can't believe that.
There are some incredibly easy games online. The low rake (works out much less than 5%), and the no tipping makes for good conditions. Holdem is the hardest online game to make money at. Maybe you should consider a switch of games.
2 to 3 BB an hour on one table, is not just attainable, it is easy.
i've been winning over 2.5 times my hourly rate in the 20/40 game. (my hourly rate live is less than 1 bb/hr in the 20/40, but close to it). this is over 500 hours.
I've been winning at less than live poker, just over 3 BB an hour. However, i have a twice weekly game that is very juicy, and i have averaged over 5 BB an hour, for 86 hours.
Nevertheless, compared to a normal live game, i think that online offers worse players, lower house takes (though none of the free drinks, food that i will happily pay a small rake for), and very good games if you look for them. One table is NOT the same as another, so good choice allows for bigger profits.
I think most of the decent (good but not great) LL players are winning between 1 to 2 bets an hour per table. Two tables will increase but not double it.
On a per hand basis I'm sure that everyone does much worse online, unless they have some sort of live action tilt problem.
True Poker just opened for those of you that were waiting.... ;o)
Only low stake game going right now... sure it will change soon enough though
Checked it out. Very software - blows everyone else away.
Don't know if it is too fancy for a real money game and if it would cause confusion for me.
Only one money game going at 2/4 when I was there.
Dear fellow online poker players,
We all get our fair share of beating in Paradise. I lost over 2000K in one day at worst, but then again, when the dealer blesses me with cards and fortune I can get my bankroll in tip top shape again. Ok, I can get irritated aswell when someone puts a beat on me for the fifth time in a row while holding a premium starting hand. But, thats life. Thats poker.
I think many lose to much in "bad card periods" due to tilt. For instance, AK is only AK when you completely miss the flop and mr too loose calls u all the way with a pair of fives or worse. Hell, you want him to play this way usually. But you shouldn't speed off trying to get rid of someone you know is a calling station. That is nothing but bad poker.
Stop tilting - loose less.
Best wishes,
Fish
The question is; are these cheques that have been issued recently worth the paper they are written on? The supposed " bank drafts " are apparrantly nothing of the sort and could bounce all the way to the moon.Has anyone actually had a cheque clear through their bank yet?
Let's push this to the limit.
Ed, I thought you were going to go to Costa Rica with a team of computer experts and check out their entire operation. I was expecting a full report on their entire operation, not just talk about possible collusion. I was at least expecting your computer experts to check out their source code for funny business. You've only played 6000 hands on Paradise. How can you make any conclusions about collusion or any thing else based on only 6000 hands? I found your comments interesting, but I was expecting a whole lot more.
No, No. I have hand histories for the last 6000 hands, those were the ones that were analyzed. I have played a little over 1600 hours at Paradise.
Of the 27,000,000 flops, turns, and rivers in the live money board games the cards seemed to be random. We asked for the hole cards also, which Paradise declined to do. This was understandable on their part, they would have to remove all the screen names or I could take unfair advantage of the information, this I agree with. Of the 6000 hands that were dealt to me (since I started saving hand histories) no group of starting hands was outside the one standard deviation range.
Bill Handy can elaborate on this.
The original plan was to publish a complete report on Paradise's operations. We even wrote a rough draft of the report that was mostly favorable to Paradise. Paradise was very professional and cooperative, but we were never given the direct access we originally expected.
The hole card analysis was based only on Ed's last 6000 hands. We requested Ed's complete hand histories several times, but never received them. Extensive analysis of the 27,000,000 boards and Ed's 6,000 hands lead us to believe that Paradise's dealing algorithms are absolutely random and fair. We would need a larger sampling of hole cards to prove that the dealing is random and fair.
Paradise takes collusion very seriously and invests a lot of time and effort into catching and identifying colluders. Paradise had an honest difference of opinion with us on this issue. The data when viewed in its entirety is very convincing. The problem is that a key element of the data is Ed's raw hand histories and I know that Ed won't agree to make those hand histories public. This makes a public debate about this issue very difficult. We might be able to convince Ed to release this information to a very small group of poker experts for an independent review and analysis.
4 players left, playing 400/800. BB has 4,500 and is playing policeman. I have 2,500 button has 750, enough to get through the blinds but only just. SB has only 250 and is basically all in, bar 50. I have 44, and rather than risk a tussle with the BB at this stage i fold as opposed to raising (calling is not an option i believe). Anyway BB eliminates the SB as i had hoped to guarantee me a moeny finish (i got 2nd).
BB has pocket Tens and no doubt would have reraised me. Board came T4642 and i would have beat the BB with quad 4s over tens full, giving me 5,250 chips, and a good play for first.
But was this a good play? If the Sb had survived, and then the other player made it through his blinds, i may have been short. I still think mucking 44 in this situation is a good play (but not in most situations at this stage of a tournie), as i am either a small favourite to 2 overcards, or a huge dog.
Comments?
I would like to reexamine a call here. I agree you definitely don’t want to go to battle with the BB. However, this might be a good time for implicit collusion against the SB. Hopefully the BB is smart enough that if you call he checks. If the BB raises I fold.
I was thinking the same thing. Problem is too many players are too stupid for this on PP.
This is one of those sticky cash managment issues I don't quite understand yet. You are not getting proper odds to call but the blinds will chew you up so quickly that you have to play at some point.
I would fold here. I am very curious what others would do.
I have never seen the check it down strategy in this situation in any paradise tournies that I have played.
Ken Poklitar
I fold. With the SB just hanging on, I don't want to give him a chance to triple his money by winning. This is why a call is a terrible play. Now the button might come in giving the SB a chance to reach T1000. Get in the money 1st, then worry about position.
You will not see the button in this hand unless he has a big time premium hand AND the blinds will increase before the BB gets to him. The button should cover his screen and hit the fold button so he is not tempted to play.
When there are 2 shortstacks and I am in 2nd place with a decent stack I will let the big stack attempt to kill the shortstacks everytime.
If I get a big hand sure I will play it but why waste chips with 44.
Ken Poklitar
Well i'm glad everyone seems to agree with me. I can't see the button getting involved with anything but Aces, Kings, or possibly Queens. I know i would throw AK, or smaller pairs in his situation.
With the check it down strategy, i always type into the chat box, check it down in such situations before putting my chips in. A bet is alright on the river, only if holding the nuts or pretty close to it. However, the BB was playing overly aggressive, trying to eliminate everyone at once, rather than one player at a time. As the cards fell i would've punished him for that, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, and i don't want to risk a almost definate chance at the money with a pair of 4s that may hold up.
You should never explicitly tell your opponent to check in these situations during the play of the hand. That is two players colluding against one other player which is technically cheating.
After the fact you could explain it to the player that did not "check it down" but while the hand is on you shouldn't.
Ken Poklitar
That's a good point actually, and i won't do it again until after the play. Never thought of it like that, just explaining simple tactics to a player
Today i had a very good example of not checking it down happen. I had 5,500 the small blind was allin, the button had 70 and the under the gun player starts raising at me with J6o anyway he hit a J on the flop for 2nd pair, and bet all the way, despite me telling him how stupid he was, so i decided to punish him by reraising him at the end with pocket kings. He lost the side pot, the small blind won the 400 mian pot, and the stupid guy was eliminated 4th.
Good job at WSOP, Mr.Hill. It adds additional credence to yuor belief that problems exists at Paradise Poker. Its obvious that problems do. Where there is smoke, (as in fresh legitimate complaints every month from new sources)there is fire.
Congratulations Ed!!!
The following web site has you at 100 to 1 to win the big event. Good Luck!!! http://www.thegoodgamblingguide.co.uk/spotlight/wsop2001/wsop2001betting.htm
Thanks for the poker lessons. My Hold'em game has improved tremendously. I can't thank you enough.
Ive read somewhere that Highlands offers a very good online pokersite. Also that its hard to find the address. Ive asked for the address in an other thread with no response so apparantly it IS hard to find them.
If someone knows how to reach this site then PLS. let me know too.
thx. in advance
Yessss - found it.
www.highlandsclub.com
Understand why nobody can find them.
The webeite for Highlands is www.HighlandsClub.com .
Do hope to see you on the site soon!!!
If you have trouble downloading highladsclub.com,call their customer support,1-800-245-0553.They are there 24 hours a day and are very friendly and glad to help with any problem.I play only at highlands now after trying several other sites.HIGHLANDS is by far the best site to play on and I'd like to bet that within 1 year they are the leading online poker site.See you there.
In future use a search engine. I searched for hinglands and poker. And there it was #1 on the list
"Within 1 year they are the leading online poker site" Odds: 15 to 1 against (And I'm being way to generous)
How about being A (instead of THE)leading online poker site?
What I mean is, with their operating expenses so low, ALL epoker sites could offer jackpots, yet only Highlands does. Don't ignore the drawing power of the prospect of a boxcar payoff. It is just this attraction which has hurt the parimutuel industry so terribly as the state lotteries have drawn the "moron money" away from the race tracks.
It certainly would be nice to see the Highlands' games fill up, especially with money from the less-than-gifted looking for that jackpot bonus.
Are these guys still in business then? I've tried occasionally to log on but my computer always locks up when the splash screen appears! Hardly the sort of thing to encourage people to keep trying...
If you can't log in you can try their update link that should let you in http://www.highlandsclub.com/hlipqupdate.exe and if you have any other question you can always call them on their 800 # (1800-245-0553).
I had trouble opening an account at HIGHLANDS also,then someone told me to call their customer support number,open 7 days,24 hrs.,and they would lead me right through it.I did,and it was simple.1-800-245-0553 Hope this works for you to.
TruePoker started playing for real money today. So far, I only saw one 2-4 holdem game going, but I expect that to increase soon. What amazes me about that site, though, is how many players have to look at their cards. Some will do it over and over again, which is a great tell, especially if you're concerned over flush possibilities.
Wow!! The site is great!! Paradise will be cut in half in a handful of months!!
Hard to believe the site did not do away with this mod. If players have to actually waste time looking at their cards the games will be slow. Such tells can be of use but there are also going to be lots of actors pulling double-fakes just like in casinos. Speed is of the essence to winning players (win rate/hour) and this IMO is an idiotic mod both for the house and for the winning players.
I want to give online poker at paradise a shot, but I can't seem to muster up the courage to send money or give my credit card number to an outfit that's based in a third world nation. Also, the $0.50/$1 games that I've watched look tougher than the $20/$40 games. When I play live poker, the fishes are everywhere. I watched a $3/$6 online game for about an hour last night and was only able to pick out one bad player at a full table. I consider myself to have a pretty decent game, I don't play garbage cards, and I'm fairly immune to tilting off my hard earned dough, but something scares me about online poker. Are my fears realistic? Has anybody had any problems with paradise? I don't want to hear about anything that can't be confirmed, either. None of this 'paradise is cheating me because I lost really fast' crapola. Has anybody out there had a tough time getting their money back out? Has there been any evidence of collusion? It sure would be easy to call your partner up on a cell phone and work a game. If I have paradise take $100 off of my credit card, how much of that do they take? Do I give them $100 and end up with $90 to play with? The rake looks like it's very reasonable, and not having a dealer to tip is cool, but the games look tough! I would expect a tiny limit game to be ridiculously easy to beat. Are they there? A lot of questions for one post. Thanks in advance for your help.
Monkey Boy
If I have paradise take $100 off of my credit card, how much of that do they take?
In the end, nothing. I believe the initial surcharge is 5.25%, but you get it back through play. Say you deposit $100. You initially have 94.75 in your account, but every time you are seated in a hand where $1 is raked (whether you participate in the hand or not) a "point" is added to your account.
When you amass 100 "points" 5.00 is refunded from your outstanding CC surcharge. You only accumulate points when you have outstanding charges.
I have had nothing but good experiences with Paradise (1100 hours+). Money is easy to move in and out. Hopefully, you will only move it out :)
The games can be extremely tough at all levels. One big key to winning Paradise is good table selection. There are easy tables to be found (nothing as easy as my live casino though).
One tip - keep logs on the players that you play against (a fish list, a shark list, etc.) because if you play often you come across them again and it will help your table selection.
Good Luck
Jump right in! You aren't one of those paranoid fools are you? Just be sure to raise evry time with K-10o in late position. You will be rich! Quit your job!
n/t
wino proof-ed on internet calamities>
Read *yawn*'s post for info on credit card charges, this isn't a big concern. Collusion almost certainly occurs but I wouldn't be fearful of it unless you intend to play at 10/20 or above. Even then, collusion is tough to do properly and inept colluders will end up costing themselves money.
Getting money in and out of Paradise isn't a problem. I live in Australia and recently cashed out $1,000 and got it by express courier within a week (although my bank will take ages to cash it).
The games are tougher than real life at all limits and none of them are "ridiculously" easy to beat. The easiest game is probably 1/2. I beat this game for at about 4BB/hr, with quite low variance, playing two tables at once. 0.50/1 is slightly harder for various reasons and the games gradually get harder as you move up limits, but are beatable all the way up to 5/10 for good players (and beyond for excellent players). The key to beating the very low limits is aggression. Many of the players will call any two cards on the flop, so don't give up if called there.
I recommend you at least give Paradise a go - but make sure you're adequately bankrolled. Swings happen.
Chris
try Planet Poker. If you can't spot 3 bad players who play worse than you in the 10handed 20/40 game, then that means you are a bad player yourself.
Is a fact as of today/tonight.
I think it may increase the action on the regular 'cash' games quite a bit, and establish Omaha 8 as firmly the second biggest game at Paradise. Hold'em has really been my only game since I started playing 'real' poker, but I have recently started to grow an interest in Omaha split.
As a novice, I gather the impression that the general level at micro/low limit Omaha 8 tables is lower than that at micro/low limit Hold'em tables. I've heard that the S.D. is lower as well, is this correct?
lars
The general level of a low limit Omaha8 game is terrible, much worse than any other online game. Omaha8 at the low limits is a game where the very best hands warrant a play but not a lot of preflop action.
In low limit preflop raises only increase your std dev. as they will not chase anyone out, but when you miss your flop (A2 will miss making the nut low well over half the time), then you have put extra money in for no return, and worse still you may have signalled to A3 and 23 that you hold A2, and will miss oout on their money BECAUSE you raised preflop.
So play the board.
In my continued effort to prove just how stupid the headline argument is, here is a real life example of high placed, successful folks cheating the rest of the world (alledgedly). I'll post more as they catch my eye.
n/t
I had argued that internet poker probably isn't site corrupt because there's so much dough to be made running a clean game, under the assumption that most people prefer more dough to less dough.
But I had no idea that there existed "high placed, successful folks cheating the rest of the world." Finally we have proof, and there's no point in my trying to deny it. It seems pretty obvious that most people would prefer, instead of guaranteed wealth, a "morass of litigation," bankruptcy and being the target of an SEC probe. After all, if this weren't the norm, why on earth would Mr. Slotnick's travails be news?
Well, perhaps not most people. Maybe just most rich people. No wonder the prisons are filled with the money-hating poseurs.
"Where's that money you silly, stupid old fool? Where's that money? Do you realize what this means? It means bankruptcy and scandal and prison. That's what it means. One of us is going to jail. Well it's not going to be me!"
– From the ironically happy scene in It's a Wonderful Life that I had always misunderstood until now.
Chris what proof are you referring to
"Greed, for want of a better word, is good."
Gordon Gecko in Wall Street 1984
His point wasn't that because Slotnick did that therefore Paradise must be doing it, just that its possible. And if you think the SEC or anyone else would investigate or litigate Paradise, a Costa Rican corp., for any wrongdoing they commit in regards to a rigged software, you are brain dead.
His point isn't that it's possible for PP to cheat, but but that PP does cheat, or at least probably cheats, and his evidence is that criminality by the sucessful is rare. So he's disproving his point in the course of knocking down a straw man. It's like his other argument that players can't win because the site is rigged to prevent them from losing.
Of course the SEC can't touch PP. It's the marketpower of the players that can.
I don't see that this proves anything other than the possibility that Paradise might cheat it's customers, which is true for any business, anywhere. I read with great interest the posts that claim that there is something sinister going on at Paradise, but there's not a shred of evidence that proves it. Maybe it's ego that's gobbling up your money. Could it be that Paradise is running a clean operation and you guys who watch your bankroll disappear just plain suck at poker? No Way!! Somebody please show me some proof, some personal experience where the odds are so ridiculous that it really couldn't have happened. Had your straight flush cracked three hands in a row? Money disappeared from your account? Paradise won't send the check? All I ever hear is how prompt they are about sending back the money.
Monkey Boy,
What Doug Duke is saying is that defending Paradise by asking, "Why would they cheat?", has no value. It is a waste of time to say it, and a waste of time to read it.
Tom D
Just so.
nt
FYI today I received an installment cheque for 20% of my initial buy-in. No email just a cheque. Was very well received. Am glad to see it and have hope for the future. Regards, Dave
I just recieved this email explaing alot what was happening.I was very frusrtated on not being paid on a cashout made Mar 17,as well on not having my emails promptly responded to.This email is very encouraging and if it comes out true,will definately put pokerspot in a higher standing in my view.It looks like they are now actually trying to pay people and at the same time provide a safe game.I hope it comes true....
Hi, Management has informed me that your cashout for $1500 was processed today (Thursday) and will be sent from our bank in Nevis via FedEx tomorrow (Friday). We are very sorry for the delay in processing your cashout. You, personally, were not really suspect, but you played with a person who was, so you were also investigated. This would have been done earlier, but with our financial crisis we had to lay off 2/3 of our engineers (and nearly all our support personnel). This meant that analyzing hands took much longer, since we need engineers to send us the hand logs and run the software we developed for fraud detection. We haven't hired everyone back yet, either, since we are conserving our resources to repay all the older cashouts and our expenses incurred during those months. Again, we apologize, and we are working to process cashouts much more quickly. By June, we hope to back to processing cashouts in 2-4 days, as we were at the end of December. I understand if you would rather not deal with us any more, but if we can be of any further assistance, please let us know.
Sincerely,
Pokerspot Support
What is the most reputable online poker room that offers NL hold'em? Tournament style is preferable, as I assume it's cheaper to play (and more fun). I want to try out some NL. :P
If you want it to be very cheap, you can play NL hold'em for free on the pokerpages.com warm-up tournaments.
Or if you want to play for money, try pokerspot.com
I too have received a 20 percent version of my original cashout made back on January 7th. Has anyone's check cleared their bank yet? Also, I noticed on the check it stated the "Bank Of Nevis" location was in New York. It shouldn't take 2 weeks to receive a check from NY. Any of you toidy toid and toiders ever hear of or had dealing with this bank? It would be reassuring to hear that you have. I haven't played at PS in quite a while now. Has the action picked up at all levels? If so how are the games? I really like their software and miss the $20-40 game. When I receive entirely was is owed to me (and the checks are good) I plan to start playing there again. All comments welcome, please.
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
I have received my first cashout request ($250) and i would like to thank Russ Boyd and Pokerspot for keeping their committment. I have and will continue to play there (daytrader). It is IMPERATIVE that we all keep playing there to to assure future payment of monies owed. The action there is great, the software is FAR SUPERIOR to anyone else and the RNG is the fairest deal on the planet (Mike Caro eat your hat). Concerning the Bank of Nevis: Nevis is a speck of an island with a population of just over 2000 full time residents. It is a banking haven because it is tax-free. Over 40 banks have storefront offices on the main downtown street. Mail goes out of Nevis on a 5:30 sea plane to St. Maarten a nearby larger island, it then is flown the following day to San Juan, Puerto Rico where on the day next it arrives in Miami and then goes on as if you mailed the original letter from Miami so that you should then receive it with in three more business days for a grand total of 6-7 business days from when it was originally sent from Nevis. The instruments we are receiving are from the bank directly and should clear assuming the bank is solvent, which according to my ex-mother in-law (who is the largest property owner on Nevis) it is. Let's go POKERSPOT-see you at the tables.
I had never played 7CS 8 or better before, so I went to the PP 0.5/1.00 game... Here you don't have to ante there is just a bring in for the low hand. IMO you can not lose at this game. If you have 3 to a low play it, if you don't fold. If you hit a brick on 4th street, then fold. You aren't fighting for any antes how can you lose?
Derrick
My guess is that your opponents could steal your bring in and sometimes another bet a lot more often than you'll make it to 4th street, where they'll refuse to play with you unless you're beaten. Still, you'd have to work at it to lose much.
I have very little experience at this. Trying to grind away at 0.50/1.00 isn't my idea of a worthwhile game.
But, I think your bring in won't be stolen too often because by definition you having to bring in will give you a better chance at a 3 card low then other random hands. You may be raised, but you have a better chance at making a low hand by having to bring in.
Derrick
If your opponents do the same thing but tighten up further than you. With a ridiculously low amount in the pot, you can screw it down much further than any three to a low. You shouldn't be playing any three to a low in a regular anted game, and certainly not in this one. I would wait for hands like A-4-5- 3-4-6 etc.
Depends on who is playing. The $.5/1 game can be surprisingly tight. The bring-in often results in a single opponent who will almost without fail raise you with any paint doorcard or ace. Are you going to fight for half with ANY low heads up? If (big IF) you actually make a low, the rake, assuming the pot reaches $5, gets YOUR 25 cents (the high gets the extra quarter). You can only lose in this case, even if you win half.
However, if the game's loose, anything can and will happen!
Play only cards that have hogger potential: 3-straight (the lower the better, preferably wheel cards), 3-flush, low trips, low pair with low kicker.
Be very, very careful with high pairs (preferably suited with an ace) and high trips (consider raising to get heads-up, even with trips). Avoid middle pairs, or middle or high straight or flush draws (2-card low flush draw with a paint kicker marginally ok but be careful).
At the lowest-limit, high-only stud I'm averaging 3.5 BB/hr, and at S/8 just 1.2 BB/hr. It's a big suck-out game and you CAN lose unless you set very high standards for yourself. See the thread titled (approximately) "What Are They Playing With?"---that IS what they are playing with.
Marilyn P.
HI To all the straight players out there. Recently it has come to my attention and proved beyond any resonable doubt that collusion is happening on paradise. I was asked by a fellow poker player if I would like to be part of organised collusion on paradise. He explained the system to me in dept. There are actually few straight players at paradise. Ok firstly colluders read and respond on this forum, What they say is true yes they are winning players. Collusion is not easy to detect. A few questions for ED.
If a player is not in a pot that he should be how many hours of work has he lost and how might he be excluded from a pot.
Give specifics as to how players might collude.
I believe planet poker have caught a huge number colluders and banned them. Theese crookes have migrated to paradise. Paradise will never release full hole card and flop historys,they say for legal reasons. Paradise invited Ed to visit their site. As soon as he agreed to go, paradise withdrew their offer. Any professional player would be able to recognise collusion by the actions of players without knowing their handles. Paradise are helping the colluders to cheat you by not providing adequate security. Would you pay to go to a casino that does not take action against cheaters??? I have been speaking to various media networks who are interested in exposing Paradises bad practices. By inaction paradise are accessories to theft. Paradise if you ignore this I will go public in a heartbeat. You either start talking to us now or I will do every thing in my power to warn the public away from you site. You may contact me with a phone number.
I would ask all the straight players not to play paradise as a show of strenght until we get a satisfactory solution to collusion. It is your money lets help each other to keep it. If we tackle this problem now the online community will benifit in the long run. Paradise I hope we understand each other.
Yours world online players assocation against collusion
I'm retiring from playing on-line and I'm lucky enough to be a $500 winner at Paradise. (After 500-600 hours!). I avg $30 per hour in 3-6/5-10 private and casino poker games so why should I waste my time when the on-line poker rooms wont take action against the colluders.
I've had the same severe swings everyone has posted and was down 1100 at one point. I also have immediately lost all remaining chips directly after cash out. I'm still convinced they can decide who they want to win and punish the players that cash out.
Its a shame cause I really enjoy playing in the privacy of my living room.
None of the methods offered for collusion outlined in this or any other forum require a degree in astrophysics to understand or to implement. Collusion is too easy and too cheap to think that it isn't happening. To require iron clad proof of such a simple process is to close your eyes and say "you can't see me because I can't see you". Any bonehead with a buddy can collude for no cost. Why do you think it only happens in the higher limits? You think the mafia is interested in cheating at poker? Nope, they want the rake. The cheaters are the low life dirtbags that haven't got enough money to play at the higher levels. They are at the low limit tables and they are not stupid as so many assume. Some are bad at it and may eventually get caught, but you'll never see the good ones, you'll only see your money in their stack. Do I need iron clad proof before I can conceptualize and or believe in collusion online? Nope, and neither should you. I think it happens regularly and often. What is the risk to reward for the colluders? Hey, a break even against a possible profit is enough for most people. If a colluder gets caught, (and some have been caught) do they go to jail? Maybe if they present themselves to the Costa Rican authorities. Otherwise, it's get out and don't come back. Owwwww! Big deterrent, yeah right. It's every day, all day. Play at your own risk.
I want to say up front that I do believe there are people colluding on Paradise. I do not believe it is widespread and I do believe Paradise is doing their best to detect these cheats. I also want to say that whatever collusion I have encountered at Paradise (if any) has not seemed to have a negative impact on my profitability. Therefore, while I do believe there could be some collusion on Paradise, I do not believe it is serious enough to concern me at this time.
On the other hand, your claims are extraordinary and deserve serious attention provided you are telling the truth. In the words of someone who escapes my memory at this moment: “In order to have credibility, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs.” Where is your proof?
"He explained the system to me in dept."
If he explained the system in-depth then why are you asking Ed Hill to explain it also? Why not just explain the system to us so that we can assess the credibility of your claim.
If you have proof then you should post your proof. No one to date has posted one iota of proof although many people have claimed to have conclusive proof. Your claim has little weight unless you can actually produce some credible supporting documentation.
What of the people who have claimed to have conclusive proof in the past? None of them ever produced any proofs whatsoever; so were they cranks or did they decide it was more honorable to protect the colluders? What about you Mr. Whistle Blower; are you going to continue withholding the information we all need?
If you have proof of widespread collusion at Paradise and you do not produce that proof then you are just as dirty as the colluders are. You are not one of those scumbags who would help the colluders to continue cheating us by withholding your evidence; are you? Without supporting evidence, you sound a lot like some of the cranks we have all had to endure in the past who also claimed to have conclusive proof but produced nothing.
By the way, Paradise has published telephone numbers and their customer support people are very responsive if you e-mail them. Maybe you should consider contacting them rather than expecting them to contact you. After all, you do sound unbelievable. Now that I think of it, it may be best for you just to send your proof to Paradise rather than posting it here, that way the colluders will not know what Paradise has just learned.
William
Mr Seabrook First off I found your post to be poor. Your attack "Scumbag" only serves to show you in a poor light. I will address all of your points. Why do you protest so much??? My proof. I was invited to join in the collusion. I have asked ED Hill to comment because he has far more insight than me and is a very respected player ,Also Mr Hill is active on this board and generally thought of as a true gentleman.
I have spoken at lenght with many pro's who all say the same thing. Paradise have been asked to explain certain things. They have either responded by closing the account of the player asking or saying elite opposition. As already stated on this board Paradise withdrew their offer of allowing Mr Hill a visit to them. I have tried many times to get through to paradise on the phone but this seems to be next to impossible. For these reasons I felt it was necessary to post here. I want to give paradise the opportunity to resolve these issues first. If I go public it will hurt the online community as a whole. I have never seen any posts anywhere about collusion at PLanet ,why??? Roy Cook is employed to stop it, as is Mr Brunson at Highlands. But Like I say I will blow the whistle in a heart beat if paradise do not either take action now or get some one like MR Hill or Mr Slansky involved. I am hopeful that any further posts from you will be polite and helpful
Yours wopac
OK, first of all I have posted various things in different threads giving a few examples of how easy it is to collude online. I too believe that there is collusion, at least in the higher limits. I believe that Paradise is dealing a totally random game. I do not believe that they are intentionally cheating any of their customers. It just doesn't make sense from a business perspective.
I have said all along that it would be in the best interest of all poker sites to hire expert players to go over the play of winning players. I believe that a combination of experts and red-flagging software is the most logical way to go. I have had in-depth conversations with Paradise and have given my word not to release a lot of the information that they have discussed with me. I was very impressed with their anti-collusion detection methods, which you will have to take my word on.
Will there software catch a lot of colluders? It depends on the skill of the colluders. If the colluders are willing to share information in a clever manner; In other words, not be blatant and not look to maximize their edge, I believe that Paradise will be very hard pressed to catch them. This is not a direct slam at Paradise, this is a very difficult undertaking that I do not believe can be done with software alone. The computer mind and the human mind work entirely different, they are more effective working together. The computer can lead the human to the areas that need examination.
There have been threads that if a player is infected with certain Trojan Horse's that it may be possible for others to see that players cards. If you protect yourself to where nobody can see your cards are you safe? No. If somebody in your game can see another players cards it will indirectly cost you money. Here is an example: Player A can see player B's cards. Player B is a loose player and comes in raising with something like A7s, player A now has a hand that dominates player B like A9 offsuit and reraises, you have 1010. Well, since it is double raised to you, you fold. IN the natural order of things you wouldn't have folded, "B" would have raised and "A" would not have reraised, since "B" is a loose player you would have probably reraised him, or at least called. Everytime the flop comes A10x player "A" has cost you a fortune.
When we are all playing in the same game we are all interrelated to some extent. Another example would be in a tournament: You have AJ offsuit, player "B" can see Player "A's" cards. Player A has 73 and is in the big blind, Player "B" has 78 and raises. Player B has stolen the pot from you. He has used the extra information that he should not have been privy to to your disadvantage even though he cannot see your cards.
As for collusion, which by the way, should be the major problem with online poker, not the hi-tech cheating mentioned above. I believe that the sites should monitor the win rates of all the winning players. Now, if these winners are playing too loosely their good results don't rate to continue. If the good results continue to occur, yet the player plays too loose to maintain these good results, then somebody needs to over this players play. Which has been my point all along. For example: What percentage of the time does this player play with other players? What hands does this player play in early position? Has he ever thrown away a better hand first in UTG than he has limped in with in the past? If the answer is yes, look around the table for somebody that has a hand that dominates his hand, that person is his likely partner. I am not saying that Paradise does or doesn't do this. What I am saying is there are a lot of ways, way too numerous to mention here to go about solving the collusion problem. I would like to hear Sklansky's thoughts on this.
I only referred to the term scumbag as it applies to those who collude and those who assist the colluders by withholding evidence (assuming there ever was any evidence in the first place). If you do not fall into either of those categories, then the scumbag remark was not intended specifically for you. Notwithstanding the above, I would like to apologize if I have offended you by using the word scumbag. In the future, I will endeavor to use a less controversial word in place of scumbag, possibly riffraff; actually, rabble or low-life might even be better. In any case, it was not my intention to offend you. Of course, if you really have no proof then I can understand why you were offended.
You state that the reason you are not willing to produce evidence at this time is because you do not want to take this issue public without first giving Paradise a chance to respond. Well, you just have taken it public without first giving Paradise a chance to respond and without producing any substantiating evidence whatsoever.
If you really have some proof or evidence then I as well as great many others who play at Paradise will get behind you one hundred percent.
You asked, “Why do you protest so much???”. I am tired of one negative claim after another being made by people who never follow through with anything to back up what they are saying. In an attempt to generate a sense of credibility, most of them start the way you just have, by claiming they have proof. Of course, they never produce any proof and all that remains after they have stopped posting is the stench of their unsubstantiated accusations.
If you really want to help the poker community, e-mail Paradise or post your proof here and let us join together to fix this problem, assuming it exists.
William
None of the methods offered for collusion outlined in this or any other forum require a degree in astrophysics to understand or to implement. Collusion is too easy and too cheap to think that it isn't happening. To require iron clad proof of such a simple process is to close your eyes and say "you can't see me because I can't see you". Any bonehead with a buddy can collude for no cost. Why do you think it only happens in the higher limits? You think the mafia is interested in cheating at poker? Nope, they want the rake. The cheaters are the low life dirtbags that haven't got enough money to play at the higher levels. They are at the low limit tables and they are not stupid as so many assume. Some are bad at it and may eventually get caught, but you'll never see the good ones, you'll only see your money in their stack. Do I need iron clad proof before I can conceptualize and or believe in collusion online? Nope, and neither should you. I think it happens regularly and often. What is the risk to reward for the colluders? Hey, a break even against a possible profit is enough for most people. If a colluder gets caught, (and some have been caught) do they go to jail? Maybe if they present themselves to the Costa Rican authorities. Otherwise, it's get out and don't come back. Owwwww! Big deterrent, yeah right. It's every day, all day. Play at your own risk.
Chip, you may be surprised to hear that I agree that there is collusion on Internet poker sites. I do not need proof that there is collusion. However, in Whistle Blower’s post, he made the following claims:
Claim: “I was asked by a fellow poker player if I would like to be part of organized collusion on paradise.”
So, Whistle Blower knows the handle of an admitted colluder on Paradise, but he would allow the rest of us to play against that player without telling us the identity of that player.
Claim: “He explained the system to me in dept.”
So, if he explained the system in depth then why not share it with us.
Claim: “There are actually few straight players at paradise.”
I do not believe this to be a true statement and I will not believe it until I see proof. If it were true I do not believe I could do as well as I have at Paradise.
Claim: “Ok firstly colluders read and respond on this forum, What they say is true yes they are winning players.”
Just because someone is a winning player at Paradise does not imply that they are part of a collusion ring. To just throw a blanket over the successful Paradise players and imply collusion should be suspected because they are showing a profit is just plain wrong.
Whistle Blower’s post was not just a routine discussion of collusion. Whistle Blower made claims for which he said he had proof, claims that indicate a highly organized and large syndicate of people cheating the legitimate players at Paradise. Considering the magnitude of his claims, I think it is fair to ask for proof.
Chip, do you believe that this group of organized colluders is so large that Whistle Blower’s statement of “There are actually few straight players at paradise” is correct? I would submit that, that specific claim is melodramatic at best and downright disingenuous at worst.
Since Whistle Blower claims to have special knowledge, do you think it unfair or unnecessary to ask him to state the details of his claims?
Do you not believe that full disclosure would be a good thing?
If we are just going to complain about the problem then we need no further detail, but if we want to do something about it then we need more information. We need the information that Whistle Blower claims to have but has not disclosed.
I am sorry if it seems dubious that I am skeptical of the magnitude of Whistle Blower’s claims, but I am skeptical and, in my opinion so should you be.
William
Sounds like we are mincing words. I am pretty tired of the various flaming posters that take someone apart because they don't have irrefutable proof of their claims or suspicions and reject everything they say because of it.
Yes, there are many straight players online. I was one of them. It doesn't take many colluders to contaminate the gene pool. I've experienced earth moving beats that resulted in an exodus from my table when exclaiming WTF???? The smart ones are hit and run. Colluding is sooooo easy it is harvest time. Sure some people win and don't collude..duh. Any two cards can win and any two cards can produce the nuts. How many times has it taken the near nuts to take down a hand on Paradise? Any fool can get it and win over colluders. Colluders don't have to win every hand they play to be wildly profitable.
I can speculate that some of the colluders post their success on these forums and villify anyone who suggests that cheaters exist. They claim that colluders are stupid, exist only at higher levels and will lose anyway. Sleep tight children, the boogy man isn't real. Nonsense. Low limit is where most of it happens. The loose and goosey play at lower limits helps to hide their game. You have heard on these forums that it is easy to win hundreds of dollars at even .50-$1. You don't think that's enough dough for a colluder? Nosing up into 3-6 on occasion can make a pretty good supplimental income for some.
Again, do I have proof? Nope, but if I were of the ilk that would cheat, I could do it. No problem. The odds are skewed in the favor of a colluder. You don't need much of an edge to have an advantage over a straight player. Out of the 100's or even 1000's of players at Paradise, what percentage do you suppose have a touch of larceny in them? It's rip and tear baby. Little to no downside and actual cash for succesful results? It's open season. Put out the nets and rake em in.
Lets stop slamming anyone who doesn't have iron clad proof of collusion. Lets stop picking apart the guy who is outraged by this obvious hole in a terrific looking boat. I would love to play at Paradise. Sitting at home in my underware instead of a smokey cardroom would increase my time playing and lessen my second hand smoke intake. I won't though. I don't knowingly play with cheaters. I don't like the odds.
Chip,
Your point about it collusion happening primarily at the low limits is extremely interesting to me. The reason is that I have spend a fair amount of time watching the low limit games in order to better understand how the dynamics of the low limit internet games are different than live games. I may be wrong, but I believe you are the first I have read who believed collusion is primarily at the low rather than the high limits and now that you mention it, it makes a lot of sense. It also explains why I have not seen much of it in the games I have been playing.
As for demanding proof of collusion, that was not my thrust and if I was not clear then I apologize. The proof I wanted was of the large organization that constitutes most of the players on Paradise.
Thanks for the low limit insight, William
Sorry if I am not totally responsive to your topic. I kind of went on a tangent and just got going.
Perhaps the topic "Low level collusion" should be a thread of it's own.
Collision will continue to exist as long as there isn't a serious downside when you get caught. That is why countries have jails, you break the law, you go to jail. There would be a lot more crime if nothing really bad was going to happen to you if you were to get caught. That is the case with online collusion, what are they going to do to do if they catch you? Close your account and let you keep all the money that you stole, gee, how harsh!
So now it just beomes an ethics question, are you honest or not? There is going to be larger group in the former, but if they latter is clever enough to avoid detection, they are going to win a lot of money.
Chip,
You make an excellent point and I would bet and I am a betting kind of guy, that you are right about low limit collusion being more prevalent than at the higher levels, on the Internet. I also agree that it would be much more difficult to detect amidst all of the noise of opening card choices and crazy play that one finds at the lower limits.
Thanks, William
P.S. Sorry if I sounded like a jerk earlier. I know I do not always have a very smooth way of communicating, as my wife likes to point out from time-to-time.
If what you say is true and you really want to do something about it, tell me how to join the group. I would be happy to work with Paradise in infiltrating the organization. I am a long time Paradise player and have experience as an undercover casino surveillance agent in Las Vegas.
Count me in, too.
I cashed out some of my money at paradise. Since then I have made over 5BB/hour for the 10 hours following the cashout. When should I expect to lose all my money?
Congratulations on your 5BB per hour rate!
You can expect to start losing your money when you start thinking and playing like the people who have been complaining. All you have to do is use them as your mentors and you too will have a reason to complain about how Paradise is cheating poor little you.
William (Who wishes he was making five BB per hour, but is happy with his current earn-rate on Paradise nevertheless.)
I have only made 2.5BB per hour since my last cashout. I am getting totally screwed!
I knew Paradise was rigged.
That's the ifo I was waiting to hear. No way Paradise is getting my money now. Thanks for the heads up, no telling how much cash and heartache you guys have saved me.
Very soon now actually. 8-)
You should never expect to lose it if you play well. Some of it yes
Any one heard about PEAR in New Jearsey Princton ?
The following is the text of an email from Paradise in response to my complaint about a player who was connected but timed-out to obviously avoid paying off with a hand that had a chance of being the best but was a probable loser; (how many times have we seen that?)The player's name has been deleted at Paradise's request.
"Thank you for your email. Upon review of the all-in that was committed by **** *** we agree that this is completely unacceptable behavior and we have excused the player from Paradise and his account has been closed.
We find your request for the $12 that **** *** cowardly avoided reasonable and have added the funds to your balance at this time.
We thank you for bringing the matter to our attention, as it is this type of misuse of the all-in feature that we aim to stamp out 100%."
Bravo! Finally some justice! Now if we could just convince them to stop giving all-in protection to players who are NOT disconnected...
That's very good to hear. I didn't think that anything would become of such complaints so i never bothered to do anything about it. In future i will note names, and game numbers for all such offenses, which i deem to be deliberate.
Natedogg...could you plz give us an update of how your ultra tight online stategy works, and if you made any adjustments.
Thanks in advance.
I would be interested in this too! Update please. :)
- Johnny
The results are very bad. I experienced an incredible bad run. This is the second time I've suddenly lost all my ability to win a pot. This one lasted for quite a while. The first time, I lost $1800 playing 5-10. This time I lost over $900 playing 3-6. When my bankroll hit $200, I finally dropped out. I don't have the bankroll to survive the swings that you can experience online. I have recently been playing some more at the .50/1 and 1/2 when I'm bored but I don't play online for real amounts anymore.
For the record, I don't believe I lost because of my tight style. I lost because I couldn't make a hand hold up no matter what. Those of you who have experienced this will know what I'm talking about. There are some posters on this forum who think we are all making it up when we talk about the super cold streaks on PP.
Those of you who have not suffered a losing streak like that will probably assume it's because I play so tight that I won't limp with AJo utg and I certainly won't open-limp with K5s from mid position (see a post below about that). Believe whatever you like. Super-tight play is the way to win online as long as you don't run bad. Actually, not running bad is the KEY to winning at poker no matter what style or level you play. If you are running bad, you will lose period.
I lost 150 big bets because I got dealt fantastic starting hands and I hit a lot of flops very hard but I was killed on the river too many times. That's all there is to it.
Session results since 3-12-01, direct from my notes, for a total of 56 hours:
PP 3-6 hold'em
3/12/01
2 tables
4.5 hours -520
balance: 720
3/13/01
2 tables
2.5 hours + 80
balance: 800
3/15/01
2 tables
1 hour
+40
840
3/36/01
1 hour 1 table
-100
740
3/16/01
2.5 hours 2 tables
+160
900
3/17/01
1 hour 1 table
+100
1000
3/17/01
3 hours, 2 tables
+100
1100
3/18/01
1.5 hours 1 table
+120 (including some heads up)
1220
3/18/01
2 hours 2 tables
-270
950
3/19/01
2 hours 2 tables
+25
975
3/20/01
1 hour 1 table
+50
1025
3/21/01
2 tables 2 hours
-75
950
3/23/01
2 tables 2 hours
-250
700
3/24/01
1 table, heads up
no change
700
3/27/01
2 tables
-25
725
3/28/01
2 tables 3 hours
-35
690
3/29/01
2 tables, 1 heads up
-170 (heads up I lost every hand practcally)
520
3/29/01
2 tables 2.5 hours
-120
400
3/30/01
2 tables 1 hour
-100
300
3/31/01
2 tables 1.5 hours
no change
300
4/2/01
2 tables 3 hours
+107
407
4/3/01
2 tables 2 hours
-100
307
4/09/01
2 tables
30 minutes
-65
250
4/11/01
2 table
60 minutes
-160
90
4/22/01
1 table
1 hour
+40
130
4/25/01
2 tables 1.5 hours
+50
180
4/26/01
2 tables 2 hours
-25
155
4/27/01
2 tables 1.5 hours
+25
180
4/30/01
2 tables 1 hour
no change
5/2/01
2 tables 1.5 hours
-25
5/3/01
2 tables 1.5 hours
+ 25
5/5/01
2 tables 1.5 hours
current balance 200
natedogg
The swing on paradise can be huge. I recently won $1500, but am on a bad losing streak of -$1000. I also need some luck soon...
I'm very sorry to hear this. I myself experienced a losing streak some time ago (not as big as yours though, mine was about 150BB), but I was fortunate to recover, and now I'm doing fine again. But it hurts, and especially when you're a good player (which I'm sure of you are; I always read your posts with great interests), and you keep getting sucked out by the poor ones. So again...I hate the hear this.
As for the strategy, I'm now more then ever convinced that you're right. Especially postflop, being tight is of great importance. When I reviewed my losing streak, I found this was exactly my problem. I was still tight pre flop, but I saw the river too many times, try to hit my AK, and yes, hitting my A, and yes, losing to an A9, cause he bet the flop with his 9 superb kicker. The classic example.
I hope to see you at the tables again some time, and yeah.....get a date with Lady Luck :-)
Regards, ME
Hey Nate,
I agree, extra-tight is the way. I know Im a much better player than 99% of the inhabitants of Paradise, but when one of those cold streaks hits, you can't win a hand with a BAZOOKA. From now on Paradise is entertainment only, it is not a place to play to make steady $ like a casino card room, the players are not operating under the same thought process, these people for the most part are playing bingo, not poker.
Natedogg, Crazy Jim and Others---
Sorry to hear about the recent misfortunes at Paradise. For those inquiring about winning on paradise, I absolutely agree with NateDogg...the only way to win on paradise I believe is to play very tight and very aggressive...I started off on paradise with around 1450, and quickly won about 1400 in two weeks, playing a lot, mind you...I began to think that the site was a money tree, and i'd be able to make essentially a living just playing on there...was killing every level i played at, and moving up from 1-2, to 2-4 to 3-6, etc...
then, one night sat down at 5-10 and dropped 400 in 1 hour...losing with all those traditional bad beats on paradise kk to 44 (he reraised preflop)lol, etc... AA to A-9 hearts, etc....
just couldn't beat the 5-10 game there...so i moved back down, before i lost all my profit, and started doing better again, only venturing to 5-10 once in a while... it is easy to see how one could lose 1800 playing 5-10 on paradise...i mean for example i raised under the gun with a-k, got 6 callers, flop came 6-5-3 hearts...i had no heart so i checked and it was luckily capped by the time it came back around so it was an easy fold...
you need a serious bankroll to play on paradise...i think 500 big bets for the level you're at is a good suggestion...i have a friend who started playing who has lost 950 dollars playing 1-2 in less than a month...
however, if you play like I believe that natedogg did from reading his posts, I believe that winning on paradise is eventually inevitable...this means not calling 3 bets with q-j suited, etc.etc...at least on paradise levels up to 5-10...
the 5-10 still gives me fits too natedogg...ironic, because i don't believe that the players are better than 3-6...one would figure with the betting structure, we'd more than make up for those suckouts they make on their 2-8 sooteds, and 6-2 offs...but still - for 5/10...:(
maybe, i've just been lucky up until now...I don't think paradise cheats, I don't think people get worse cards after cash outs, I don't really think there is much collusion, if there is a problem at all...I do think that you'll have enough bad beat stories to last a lifetime playing on paradise, and you need to be realistic about starting with a big bankroll, and playing good tight aggressive hold'em to guarantee success.....any one else's thoughts on this matter are of course welcome...
may the river run smoothly, Peter
TruePoker have now introduced $1-$2 games. The interesting thing is the blinds structure, which is the same as for Planet's $0.25-$0.5 games (anyone else here ever played those...?), namely equal in size, i.e. $1 and $1.
At the very loose Planet tables I haven't given the implications of such a structure any deeper thoughts, but at this higher level I guess you can't count on the looseness of the Planet games, so I'm curious regarding how much looser one should play in games with this structure, if you should have a different raising strategy, any other strategy changes, and whether it is a better or worse structure than the normal $0.5/$1 blinds structure.
-JDS
Here's another case of the high and mighty giving in to the temptation of filthy lucre.
This is a nice story, but has nothing to do with why a company would not cheat their customers if the said company was already making millions of dollars from them legally. Especially if getting caught would cost them all their business. If I am making X, and X is all the money I need, why risk it all to make X + a small %. The torricelli story is about a politician who wants to get elected, and might have taken some tainted donations. Although people do collude!!!!!
"If I am making X, and X is all the money I need, why risk it all to make X + a small %."
This is the billion dollar question. Why indeed? Yet this very same silliness happens in very high places every damn day.
Seem like YOU won't do it. To me, it seems like many will do it. It's baffling yet so common it must be considered a likely course for any person or organization that has succeeded. Human greed seems to know no limit for many.
"There are three basic human emotions, greed, lust and greed." Hawkeye Pierce
Im allways puzzled by the line: Why would they cheat and risk losing everything?
What do they have to lose? Whos going to punish them? "They" can cheat there asses off and never get caught. And with people that blindly stick up for an unregulated sight, that has no accountabilty to anybody they can and will.
I am not saying that they cheat, just that there is a VERY Good chance they can.
I have had some success at Paradise Poker. I find the 5/10 HE game beatable. Here is an example. I get drawn out on all the time but these bad beats are more than offset by the hand below. IMHO if you are a consistant loser at PP than your game has more than a few holes. Why did Boss call on the turn? What about those raises on the river? I had the "almost" nuts on the TURN and"stone cold nuts" on THE RIVER.
side note: be careful playing internet poker with a player whose e-mail address is cardplayer
Transcript of game #72480604 requested by (AttackDog) This email was computer generated and emailed to cardplayer@home.com ----------------------------------------------------- Game #72480604 - $5/$10 Hold'em - 2001/05/05-00:57:18 (CST) Table "Tanna" (real money) -- Seat 9 is the button Seat 2: boss40s ($539.50 in chips) Seat 3: Zoso* ($175 in chips) Seat 4: JimmyBB ($350 in chips) Seat 5: the deputy ($340 in chips) Seat 6: AttackDog ($115 in chips) Seat 7: spikeh ($163 in chips) Seat 8: pokerchump ($92 in chips) Seat 9: CapnBill ($289.50 in chips) Seat 10: Tweak ($249 in chips) Tweak : Post Small Blind ($2) boss40s : Post Big Blind ($5) Dealing... Dealt to AttackDog [ 5d ] Dealt to AttackDog [ Kd ] Zoso* : Fold JimmyBB : Fold the deputy: Fold AttackDog: Call ($5) spikeh : Fold pokerchump: Fold CapnBill: Fold Tweak : Fold boss40s : Raise ($5) AttackDog: Call ($5) *** FLOP *** : [ Qc Td 7d ] boss40s : Bet ($5) AttackDog: Raise ($10) boss40s : Raise ($10) AttackDog: Raise ($10) boss40s : Call ($5) *** TURN *** : [ Qc Td 7d ] [ 2d ] boss40s : Check AttackDog: Bet ($10) boss40s : Call ($10) *** RIVER *** : [ Qc Td 7d 2d ] [ Ad ] boss40s : Bet ($10) AttackDog: Raise ($20) boss40s : Raise ($20) AttackDog: Raise ($20) boss40s : Call ($10) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $159 | Rake: $3 Board: [ Qc Td 7d 2d Ad ] boss40s lost $80 [ Ah Ks ] (a pair of aces) Zoso* didn't bet (folded) JimmyBB didn't bet (folded) the deputy didn't bet (folded) AttackDog bet $80, collected $159, net +$79 (showed hand) [ 5d Kd ] (a flush, ace high) spikeh didn't bet (folded) pokerchump didn't bet (folded) CapnBill didn't bet (folded) Tweak lost $2 (folded) ----------------------------------------------------- If you have any questions regarding this hand history, please contact us at support@paradisepoker.com
Well Mitch if you limp in with Kd 5d four from the button than the game was pretty beatable. I would not be to proud of the results, you got very lucky!!!!
"IMHO if you are a consistant loser at PP than your game has more than a few holes."
"Dealt to AttackDog [ 5d ] Dealt to AttackDog [ Kd ]"
"AttackDog: Call ($5)"
Hmmm......
The $5-10 games often are easier than $3-6 games and you see a lot of bad play, but overall the games are tougher than in a casino. If everyone played about 15% of their hands outside the blind and both blinds played about 2/3's of the time, you'd expect an average of about 25% of the players seeing the flop. That's a tough game with blinds on the loose side. The averages on PP $3-6 and $5-10 are about 30%. Beatable but not exactly easy pickins. The average in the higher games is right about 25%.
BTW, these hand histories copied verbatim are incomprehensible and require the reader to do too much work. Why not copy them to a WP doc and edit them to something like this:
I open-raise in 3 with JhTh, new-man one calls in sb, king tutt calls in bb. F = 7c Jc 9c. New-man one bets, king tutt folds, I raise, new-man calls. T = Ac. Both check. R = 6h. Both check. He shows JdTd.
Posting a hand history like that is really messy. If you want responses then make it easy to read.
And you are one of these bad players you're talking about playing a badly dominated hand like K5suited. Its only chance is flopping a flush, two pair, or trip 5s. If you hit KKx then you either get no action or you lose a bundle to AK or KQ KJ.
Ya, I don't even bother trying to figure ouy the action on the posts that set out the hand histories verbatim. Way too time-consuming to sift through.
Hi all Just played real cash at truepoker.com I phoned them to ask what steps they have against collusion,they have a lot of pro poker players watching. The graphics are out of this world. This site should really take off. I had a great time there and made a little money.
I agree the site is phenomenal! I think there is finally real competition for Paradise. Somebody built a better mouse trap. And the feature that allows you to do hand historys direct on your computer is wonderful.
Who are the pro poker players?
Regular online loose passive, 1/2 game.
UTG raises, I raise again with TT in MP, other MP (OMP) after me cold calls, UTG calls my raise
Flop: Ac Td 9c, BB checks, I bet my set, OMP raises, UTG cold calls, I 3bet, all call.
Turn: 2d - which makes 2 of each suite, UTG checks, I bet, OMP raises, UTG calls, I 3bet again, OMP capps, UTG and I both call.
River: 3d - which can make the flushdraw complete. UTG and I both check, OMP bets, UTG and I both call.
OMP wins by showing AJd which makes a nutflush.
Did I overplay my TT???
Tnx in advance
You did not overplay. On the turn, only AA can beat you. But AA is a not so likely holding, since OMP would probably have capped AA preflop. It's more likely he's betting two pair (or maybe a big draw).
You might even want to value bet on the river, since every two pair will pay you off, and maybe even a good ace or something, since the pot is so big.
Not much you could do here, it happens. Keep playing sets aggressively!
Regards, ME
You played your hand fine. You charged both players the maximum for their draws and just got unlucky on the end. OMP overplayed his hand postflop. His call of the 3 bet preflop is bad poker especially when the raising comes from early position players.
Dugie
I disagree. First of all, AJs is not a worse hand than pocket 10s, even heads up it will do ok. In a 3 way pot give me AJs any day. Secondly, the 10's were played fine after the flop, but 3 betting and UTG raiser is a little risky, although in a loose game with loose raisers its probably fine. Losing was a bad beat, but you have to remember AJs is a monster hand in a weak game, and the AJ thought (reasonably, in the low limit games lots of players will 3 and 4 bet any ace) that he probably had the best hand.
Maybe you could explain to me why you would play AJs in a 3 bet 3 way pot? He said this was a loose passive game which usually means players only raise with the nut starting cards and will call with any others.
My comments for not playing AJs are as follows:
In order for MP's AJs to win, he going to need a parlay of hand combinations of sorts between UTG and the reraiser. So lets look at the possible combination of hands that a typical UTG raiser and 3 bettor will make in a limit game. My references below do not refer to tough games.
UTG - AA,KK,QQ,JJ,1010,99,AK,AQ,AJ MP 3 bet - AA,KK,QQ,JJ,1010,AK
The parlay that has to happen between the 2 players hole card combinations is difficult to overcome (dominated). If an A flops, of the 15 combination of typical raising hands, he is dominated by 6 of these. If a J falls on the flop, he is dominated by 8 of these. Your basically playing the hand for the flush potential and against 2 callers you do not have sufficent pot odds to make the call. I agree with you that if and only if you are assured that several players will enter (5,6,7,) the pot for 1 raise, then you can call the raise because you are getting the right amount of action required should you make your flush.
As a side note, 3 betting with 10-10 in order to isolate the early position raiser is a good move provided that the game is typical. If you have several players who will chase for big pots then I think a call is ok. This way you will get the impied odds of many callers to hit your trips and make a big hand.
Gerald
Cold-calling three bets with AJs is terrible. Three-way, solid action is probably the worst POSSIBLE spot for AJs. Against one UTG raisor only, AJs is likely to stand a small, but yet close to fair chance, unless up against AA.
In the spot AJs find itself when three-betted into, I would suppose the worst hand the three-better will have here is TT or AK/AKs. Lets assume all the other likely holdings; JJ, QQ, KK & AA and a better ace for the UTG raisor (again, very likely). How bad shape is AJs in now? This three-way action ain't enough to play a flush draw alone, as as you may figure by now, and two opponents instead of one can have a (likely) combination of hands which calls for real luck for AJs to be ahead at the showdown. As I said, against one opponent, unless AA, he may be dominated, but stands a considerable chance never-the-less.
Also remember that even in this spot, against TT and probably a better Ace, trip jacks will be prone to lose against straights and fulls and the AJ straight is prone to lose to a full (TT needs at least a set for AJ to become a straight).
lars
apparently not
You had the best hand until the river right? Why wouldn't you want to bet the best hand? He would probably cap it preflop with AA, but then again he might just coldcall.
He just sucked out on you badly.
Sincerly, Andreas
What would be the best book to introduce someone to poker?I mean the very basics,not strategy necessarily but how many cards you get,when do you act etc. Any suggestions especially for holdem,omaha and 7 stud?
Try the Fundamentals of Poker. You can order it from this site.
Dan Kimbeg's book "Serious Poker" is also a great book that covers what you need to know. His book cabn be bought through conjelco.com, or seriouspoker@kimberg.com Buckcp........ who has no ties with Mr. Kimberg, or Conjelco
Someone once posted that ZoneAlarm can prevent people from 'looking at your cards' when you are playing online. How do you use the settings to prevent access to your cards and also not interfere with your playing?
Thank you,
Jim Kuhn
Sygate is better and just set sygate to medium www.sygate.com
It amazes me that the general poker community doesn't think collusion is profitable enough at low levels. They must have a different perspective than the normal dishonest minimum wage unemployed clever and certainly not stupid Joe, who thinks a weekly supplemental income of 100’s of US dollars is PLENTY of money thankyouverymuch. If one could sit on ones unemployed (and probably federally funded) behind and clear tax free money to purchase their vices with, why not? They don't need to clear 10 grand a week cause they are just average guys, and their Honda Civic needs gas. It's not a job, it's a hobby. Tell me a more profitable one.
Live Update: Right this minute, 1450 players are playing at 164 tables!
I think we all agree or are at least concerned that collusion exists. Lets take a wild stab at the percentage of online players that cheat...maybe 2%? 10%? Lets say that 43.5 to 145 guys are cheating right now. If a cheaters group of players were at 50% of the low limit tables, how long would it take them to find you? Would you like to sit down with those opponents? Heck, it's hard enough to win when it's fair. If you play online, the above jokers are out there. Sooner or later, your stack will be theirs. They have the edge and in the long run, it's their money.
You may dodge the bullet, you may even beat him, but you'd be on a par with the big winner at roulette, hit the jackpot at keno, win all the time at slots or any other long shot game because thats what cheaters reduce your odds to when you go up against them. Low limits should be where they look for collusion. The job is daunting, almost impossible. If they catch someone, there is no recourse that I'm aware of. If banned, they can be back online anonymously almost instantaneously.
Do I need proof of this concept to stop dropping $100 bills at Paradise? Nope. You winning? Good for you. Are you losing? Hmmmmm. I love poker. I wish I could love Paradise. Unfortunately for me and quite a few other self acclaimed successful live game players, it’s more like a root canal.
You are worried about online collusion. The simple answer is don't play holdem. Go to a game like Omaha8 where you can win even if the entire table is against you specifically.
Sounds like fun. I'll be there.
no, you are much worse off playing in a split game if there is collusion. the good part is that is is almost impossible for bad low limit players to play in such a way that it really makes you a loser. the better ones would only cost you some earn and the worst ones would add to your win rate. for bad players to make any significant earn off of you it would require play that would be very obvious, and your countermeasures would make them defenceless. good players smart enough to really hurt you would play much higher and soon split up and play on their own once they realize its too much work to cheat by playing partners.
Ray said, "your countermeasures would make them defenceless"
Ray said, "soon split up and play on their own once they realize its too much work to cheat by playing partners"
David Sklansky previously stated that he would NEVER lose at Omaha 8 if he was able to play 3 hands. That kind of earn doesn't sound like to much work.
Ray,
I agree: collusion is worse in a game like O8. I also agree that bad players colluding aren't the problem. But good players colluding and it is a disaster for the honest people.
I am sure that I played against colluders at O8 and Omaha online, especially at Omaha. With 4 cards, and good players, two people colluding makes it impossible at any level for any other player to win.
After reviewing my records, I believe that the only game I did not see or feel there was a lot of collusion was at Stud. What does eveyone think of stud and collusion? Is it a potential (theoretical) problem?
(I won a lot at Stud online , but could never win at HE or O8; at the Casino my best game is O8, second is HE and Stud is last).
Mark
I agree with you Ray that split games are much worse for collusion as you can get stuck in the middle of two hands very easily, and they just end up chopping your money.
However, i play microlimits and follow the advice in your book (fantastic book by the way), and draw only to the stone cold nuts for low, and only nut straights, nut flushes, or big fulls for high. By doing this colluders have very little to gain from working together against me.
My partner threw away the Ac, now I flop the King high flush draw. Or my partner threw away 22 and I pick up A3. If you think this isn't hurting you, think again. Everytime you and I split a pot when you should have won the whole pot you are getting hurt.
Ed,
While in my experience at Paradise I did not feel there was a great deal of collusion, my overall rate was indeed worse at 10/20 O8 than at other games. Maybe I don't play O8 as well as other games, maybe I played two tables more often while playing O8 which hurt my results, maybe the game is just a lot slower, maybe the average O8 player was tougher, and maybe I really was facing more collusion at O8, or any combination of the above. I gradually played less and less 10/20 O8 at Paradise and more Hold'em because I was getting fed up with Paradise O8, and the game did seem to play a bit more strangely somehow than the other games. So I did the practical thing rather than the theoretical thing in this regard.
As you may have gathered from my other posts, I do not feel there was widespread and insurmountable collusion during the time I played on Paradise, but I always kept a weather eye and was more likely to feel like employing a bit of a "stop-loss" floor to my overall win precisely because I feel more vulnerability playing online and live so close to nearby casinos anyway. My argument has always been with the idea that there is definitely something wrong in a major way with Paradise or that there is definitely widespread collusion, not with the idea that these things are possible to some degree, and I always approached playing online cautiously in some ways. For instance in a casino I would not really consider setting a floor on losses from a profited amount, but I more or less did this with playing online in an overall sense (not in a per-session sense).
Hi All,
I'm currently working on a Paradise Poker hand analyzer program that will be released as shareware under the name PokerStat. I will need testers soon. If you want to be placed on a mailing list for PokerStat, send an email request to support@thsoftware.com. I will email this list when the beta is ready.
PokerStat will eventually be sold as shareware, and I am going through the proper steps to register names, my business, and getting all necessary licenses and tax forms. If anyone knows that the name PokerStat is already registered to someone, let me know. Thanks!
- Tony, TH Software
tony@thsoftware.com
nt
Chris,
It keeps track of your starting cards, and gives statistics on your results with different cards/position/whether it was bet/raised/called in front, etc.
How loose/tight opponents are, how much they have won/lost based on hands you've observed (it will give an average won/lost per hand per opponent in dollar terms and in big bet terms).
Also the ability to filter information based on any of various criteria like days of the week, time, limit, etc... so you can get information like how much you win/lose at certain times, and also how much opponents win/lose at certain times.
It will keep track of hands shown, and things like how many full houses/flushes/straights get shown down (shown down meaning a river card was dealt and hand was shown). It will also keep track what percent of the time you get each of the 169 starting hand combinations.
It keeps track of enough about the hand that it's possible to add queries later as needed, hopefully without having to reconstruct the database. Anyways, I'm always open to input, thanks!
- Tony
Open an account with highlandsclub.com,the only poker site with a bad beat jackpot.The jackpot was just hit for $54,000.00[that's right,$54,000.00]on May 1st,2001.They started a new one at about $11,000.00 that same day,and of now May 5th,2001 it has grawn to over $12,000.00 already.Also,if your one of their customers that play the 100 most hands for the month of May,then you get to play in their completely free roll tournament the 1st Tuesday of the following month[in this case it will be held on Tuesday,June 5th at 9Pm eastern time].Any problems opening an account call customer support @ 1-800-245-0553.They pay out overnight at their expense if the check is for $300.00 or mor,otherwise regular mail.See you there.
If Highlands can afford jackpots, all the sites can.
Yes Jake,your right,if HIGHLANDS can afford jackpots and a free foll tournament giveaway of over $5,000.00 each month,then certainly Planet and Paradise can easily afford to.BUT WHY DON'T THEY?
The answer is simple.
Greed and profit motive.
The only way that Planet or Paradise would consider adding a bad beat is if they were losing so much business that their income were drastically reduced by more than the amount of a jackpot.
JMHO, of course.
The Jackpot isnt a bad idea for Planet and Paradise, but this is actually funded for the most part by the winners of each pot. They take 25c from each $10 or better pot and place it in the Jackpot fund. This is in addition to the rake. Highlands only adds $25 a day to the Jackpot, and it is not available to the low limit players. Maybe they could have a seperate Jackpot for low limit games.
Planet has been running freeroll tournaments, which are for less money than highlands, but they happen much more often. Paradise hasn't but have been talking of it in a recent email newsletter. However, I'm not sure if they have the capacty to run multi table tournaments, and they certainly couldnt hold one for all of their customers at once. They should however do something a little more often. The 50,000,000th game giveaway was good.
HI ... I was just wondering if anyone else has noticed that IRC poker is down or if there is some problem with my program. I use cable and don't usually have any problems... thanks
choco
Ed Hill's comments from an earlier post:
"Collusion will continue to exist as long as there isn't a serious downside when you get caught. That is why countries have jails, you break the law, you go to jail. There would be a lot more crime if nothing really bad was going to happen to you if you were to get caught. That is the case with online collusion, what are they going to do to do if they catch you? Close your account and let you keep all the money that you stole, gee, how harsh!"
Is that not what they do in brick and mortar casinos? (Kick them out and let them keep the money they stole).
As a professional poker player, do you or anyone else know of a player being thrown in jail for cheating specifically at poker?
P.S. In no way am I defending collussion, it stinks, and colluders should be punished. Just trying to do the obvious online vs b&m comparison.
I think that (at least in Nevada) you have to be caught using a "device" in order to face serious penalties. The evidence of colluding is probably too weak to stand up in a court of law in most cases so all a casino can do is bar you and pass your name and face on to other establishments.
Of course on-line you can't take a couple guys to a back room and beat the shit out of them (but I think that's a thing of the past or a thing of casino mythology anyway).
Paul Talbot
Online colluders should forfeit all the money in their accounts. The money should then be distributed back to the legitimate players in the form of a jackpot, free roll tournament, or some other promotion.
The only way that a site can confiscate funds with any level of reliability and integrity is by using an expert poker player to review the evidence. Additionally, when a player feels they have been wrongly accused an independent organization representing the interests of poker players should be allowed to review and verify the accuracy of the poker sites conclusions.
I finally decided to give up on Paradise Poker after more than 14 months. By posting this I hope to save some of you a few dollars. There are probably many of you who won't believe what I have to say, so you'll have to learn the way I did.
I started playing Holdem seriously in November 1995. I bought Theory of Poker by David Sklansky and Holdem Poker for Advanced Players by Sklansky and Mason Malmuth. I bought books by several other authors, including Roy Cooke, Lou Krieger and John Feeney. I studied the books. Especially TOP and HPFAP, which I have read, read, and reread many times. I've played in Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, Texas (yes, there are 2 casinos in Texas) and California.
The good news is that the work paid off. My playing skill has improved steadily, and I now find most 10-20 players, and a large number of 15-30 players, easy competition.
I wasn't doing terribly bad on Paradise Poker, although I had been losing slowly for several months. It didn't make sense to me. I saw players making what seem like bad plays, not only at the low limits, but even at 15-30 and 20-40. Since I saw so many bad players, I thought my expectation had to be positive. I played very tight and aggressive. I think this slowed my losing, but I was losing.
I am well educated (two graduate degrees, both in Mathematics) and program computers for a living (my undergraduate degree is in Computer Science). It would be INCREDIBLY EASY for a player, or a group of players, to collude.
There is software for sale to the general public (such as PC Anywhere) that can completely control a PC from a remote location. All anyone would need to do is to travel to a nearby location, rent a cheap apartment, and get a phone installed. Download Paradise software, install the software necessary to connect to the PC and control it from home. Now that person can be two players at the same table on Paradise. If they're an experienced player, this could be completely undetectable by anyone (unfortunately, even by Paradise or a poker expert). The additional information gained by being two players at the same table can help the player decide when to fold, call or raise with marginal hands like KJ. Also, the players actions can work together so the winning player wins a few more bets than he would have otherwise. Most people have friends that would cash checks made out to them for a percentage, no questions asked, so getting the money out of Paradise is no problem.
Of course collusion is even easier if more than 1 person is involved. They can chat with each other in another window while playing. As Ed Hill suggested, each person just telling the rest of group the cards that they folded each time would give the group a big advantage.
Considering the kind of money that could be made from doing this (100K per year, or more) I have no doubt that it is being done A LOT (at all levels). An experienced card room player will notice the games on paradise are way too loose. The loose players are not being punished for playing too loose, but are instead winning money from the tight players. Any experienced player knows that it is not the way things normally go.
Online poker has cost me about $7K. There are probably some out there that have lost more, but I won't be losing any more online. I'll win back the $7K, but I'll do it in live games.
My advice to you is to stop playing online poker immediately ! It is not cheap and it isn't the way poker is played in the cardroom (ie it's not good practice either). If you live where card rooms illegal, I suggest buying Texas Turbo Holdem.
Bob J.
Good post. Another problem is that an otherwise winning player might use such a system infrequently to hedge, and thus fall under the detection wire. On the other hand, an occasional weak player might not make the very toughest PP tables sufficiently beatable by any but the very best.
About how many hours did you play?
Hi
I have been checking with several computer people. They all say Paradise is risky business. The company itself probably does nothing illegal. My guess is they do as best they can. BUT
1) Colluding is by no mean a problem to arrange. There are several ways of doing it. Advanced and expensive ways that enebles you to control multible seats and accounts or simple cheap ones like just using a messenger service or phones etc. This is frightening.
2) It should be possible to hack the encrypted messages Paradise send to each and every one of us when we recieve our hole cards. People has hacked Pentagon and other "safe" places. Paradise poker would probably be more challenging than that. Yeah sure!!!!!!!!
I have quit using online poker for now. Like the online idea, and it would preferable to most if it was clean.
Therefore I and a bunch of the best programmers you can find will start TOMORROW with planning a new site. We will get it fully funded in a matter of weeks, and we will DO all we can to stop the cheaters.
BUT : We would really like to hear from all you good poker players in the world. What do you want from an online site. Please help us make one. If you want to invest a few dollars in it aswell, that be fine :) We will let players invest at a nice price.
Please let us know,
WW
William,
Minimum, $1.5 million and at least 18 months of programming. You will also have to play catch up to all the new features existing sites will have come up with during your 18 month development period. So add .5 million and 6 more months = 2 million and 2 years.
Any players who invest and staff should be restricted from playing on your site. You might want to consider restricting any friends and family from playing too.
Good luck.
What's your URL?
bob what level(s) at pp do you play in? also, do u think the 3/6 or 5/10 games on pp are beatable? do u think people cheat at 3/6 and 5/10? if, so what percent of the 3 and 5 games have colluders thanks
My lifetime experience is that cheats must learn their trade somewhere. That is often at the lowest limits. I've seen cheating at sub $1 limit live games.
An experienced card room player will notice the games on paradise are way too loose. The loose players are not being punished for playing too loose, but are instead winning money from the tight players. Any experienced player knows that it is not the way things normally go.
well said. The people who play online and defend paradise must be the people colluding. Its very obvious paradise does not play anything like a casino.
well said. The people who play online and defend paradise must be the people colluding.
That's an irresponsible statement and it's untrue.
>>well said. The people who play online and defend >>paradise must be the people colluding.
>That's an irresponsible statement and it's untrue.
I'll rephrase it.
Some of he people who play online are colluding AND defending Paradise in order to maintain the flow for suckers.
I'll rephrase it.
Some of he people who play online are colluding AND defending Paradise in order to maintain the flow for suckers.
Do you know that for a fact and can provide specific details or is this just wild speculation?
The good news is that I don't feel the need to prove anything. I'll never play at Paradise again. You, poor suckers, need to prove the game is honest and that is impossible.
I never felt the need to prove the the games on Paradise were entirely honest.
I only felt the need to win honestly at them, and this I managed to do.
M,
Would you post some hand histories to prove you have won?
Tom D
No. Are you serious? How would a few winning hand histories prove anything other than that I won those hands?
M,
You rest your whole argument, that nothing is amiss at Paradise, on your being able to beat the games easily. All I know about that is what you say, and that means I don't know anything. I'm not buying it.
Your theory, that more hands being dealt per hour hurt winning players, doesn't inspire much confidence in the things you say.
Tom D
My theory is not at all that and I am a bit puzzled as to why you think so. Of course I agree that more hands per hour helps winning players, and I am a staunch advocate of games moving quickly both online and in live play. What I am trying to say is that taking twice as many beats per hour can be psychologically unsettling for certain players and may cause some to feel the game plays more strangely than what they are accustomed to.
Also, my whole argument is not based on only my own performance, as you would know if you had followed my recent posts.
Further, I never said I beat the games easily, only that I beat them. In fact I underwent quite a learning curve with online poker.
I'm not trying to sell you anything, but if I was, I would consider charging you double ;-)
Ed Hill and computer experts analyzed this and came up with the collusion conclusion. What more prove do you need genius? Either your one of the colluders trying to promote the site to suckers or you're just naive. Keep donating.
Lock Low (not playing at Paradise again until they get a Poker Expert to monitor the cheats.)
"Ed Hill and computer experts analyzed this and came up with the collusion conclusion. What more prove do you need genius? Either your one of the colluders trying to promote the site to suckers or you're just naive. Keep donating."
"Lock Low (not playing at Paradise again until they get a Poker Expert to monitor the cheats.)"
Thanks for making my point.
?
ROTFLMAO!
This thread started with talk that some people like myself could easily be the colluders on Paradise Poker wanting to keep the flow of suckers coming in. I asked "Do you know that for a fact and can provide specific details or is this just wild speculation?"
In the case of this latest post that I responded to, I think we got our answer -:)
Bob,
I have not been playing much online lately (just a few times this year) but I will say that last year I played extensively for several months for long hours and beat the games on Paradise, Highlands and Pokerspot all quite convincingly. I did this wihout resorting to anything like collusion or hacking and at levels from 5/10 to 20/40 with my average level being close to 15-/30. Certainly collusion such as you describe is possible and no doubt it takes place to some extent, but I did not find that it was at such a level as to prevent my winning overall. David Sklansky posted that he knew of quite a number of professional players who have also beat the games on Paradise convincingly, some much more so than I have. Unless the level of collusion has been raised a great deal in the last six months I would not worry about it too much. Of course, this has occurred. I wouldn't know. If it has then certainly it would be something to worry about. I believe David also posted that he expected the level of collusion to eventually rise, perhaps inevitably (unless perhaps if the sites took far stronger precautions to detect collusion).
In addition to the possibility of the greater presence of collusion now, I would think it a pretty fair guess that the average long-term player has improved, making the games tougher. There is another factor too, and that is the fact that now many banks will not now approve credit card transactions which are coded as online gaming purchases. This must have the effect of reducing the influx of loose/new money into the player pool of funds, quite probably to a significant extent. This must of course make the games less easily beatable.
I have not been keeping up with the Internet Forum for quite a while. These are just some things to consider. Also, being a winning live player does not necessarily translate to being a winning online player. Some online players are just extremely good, and many of the skills needed to beat online poker are different than skills which can beat live poker. I was shocked at one point when Paradise informed me I was seeing about 25% of the flops, as I think I play considerably tighter than that in a casino. Maybe I don't, maybe I just think I play very tight in a casino. But is interesting that, if memory serves, David Sklansky happened to post that he was seeing 25% of the flops. If I remember this incorrectly then I apologize to David and to all, but I don't think I am remembering it wrong.
It would also be of interest to me if the same list of winners David Sklansky had previously referred to is still doing about as well. I personally lost back about 10% in a half-dozen or so plays this year (which still left me a net online 5-figure winner from last year, though not by a great deal) and I felt the games weren't as good as they were previously so I turned my attention elsewhere, although I certainly wondered about collusion and any effect it might have had because a number of play patterns I observed during those few sessions early this year just felt very odd. It was nothing I could say with certainty that I felt smacked of collusion, though. I asked one significant winner by email if she felt there might be more collusion recently but the response was that she didn't feel this was the case.
So in summary I am just pointing out that many factors can be at work, and that while awareness of possible collusion is good, it is not necessarily true that you your net loss was due primarily to being up against much collusion. It is a worthy subject for discussion, however, with the best emphasis being on facts rather than speculation.
Discussing whether collusion may have increased during the last six months I wrote:
"Of course, this has occurred. I wouldn't know."
I meant to write:
"Of course, if this has occurred, I wouldn't know."
"I was shocked at one point when Paradise informed me I was seeing about 25% of the flops, as I think I play considerably tighter than that in a casino"
Can you ask for this or something?
Thanks.
Yes.
I think I asked them for some other basic data, like # of total hands I had played, and they gave me this data as well.
You can minimze the concern about collusion all you want. The truth is, when you are up against an even modestly adept colluding person or group, the odds change. You no longer have the best of it playing the numbers, the numbers are against you.
You're not going to find the colluders at the higher limits. There are fewer games and I'd hazard a guess that most higher limit players know each other. The real volume of villians are at the lowest levels. The play is loose anyway, bad beats are the norm and they can truly fly "under the radar". Most low limit players aren't sophisticated enough to be able to detect collusion if it slapped them in the face.
To tell the general poker playing public not to worry about collusion because "you" did not get fleeced is irresponsible. To minimize the effect of collusion is simply wrong. The odds are skewed and they are skewed big time.......if you are up against it. If you play online at the low limits, you will go up against it. Most likely, it is happening every day...all day. There is just no way that the nefarious characters that would collude aren't colluding. It is too easy and too cheap to accomplish. There is absolutely no downside risk against a most probable windfall profit. If it is not widespread now (and I believe that it is), it will be.
I agree with an earlier poster. Stop playing online immediately. Until they no longer make huge rake profits, they will not address or acknowledge collusion as a MAJOR problem. Maybe some pro's can tear em up. The average player doesn't stand a chance.
It is open season on the gullible. Don't believe the shills that assure you the boogy man doesn't exist. If they do you can be pretty sure they want you there. It is not poker, it is another game with which I am not familiar.
I am not saying that the public should not be concerned about possible collusion. I am saying that when I was playing online last year I do not think I ran into it very often and regardless showed a healthy profit. Last year too David Sklansky learned of a substantial number of big winners who are also highly skilled players, and he suggested that it was unlikely that this would be the case if there was widespread collusion. Perhaps this has changed by now, perhaps collusion is more widespread today, perhaps those same winners are no longer winning. I would be curious to find out.
You state that you believe that online collusion is now widespread. Well, OK, it may be. Why do you think so? If you would care to support this statement with some actual hand histories which show probable collusion, I think the forum participants would be quite interested. It is doubtful if most low limit players who attempt to collude would be knowledgable enough to do so in a manner which is quite effective yet subtle enough to escape notice upon examination. As Sklansky has demonstrated with a few questions in prior posts, expert collusion is far harder theoretically than expert play. So I can't believe that most colluding low-limit players are both expert players and expert colluders--if they are colluding, most of them are probably both largely ineffective and somewhat obvious. If they were both expert players and expert colluders, they would naturally gravitate towards higher limits (with possibly a few exceptions). So again, why do you believe that online collusion is now widespread? I'm not saying it isn't, but if you have some factual basis for your belief perhaps you would care to discuss it further.
Ok, here’s a business plan.
Concept: Clean up at Online poker Items to get:
1) 2 phone lines
2) 2 cheap computers (if you don’t already have a couple)
3) 5 dial up ISP’s (dynamic IP’s only)
4) 2 online nicks for each ISP
5) 5 fake id’s
6) 5 PO Boxes at different locations
7) 5 bank accounts with fake id
Ok, now I’ve got 10 online poker accounts. My two buddies also have 10 for a total of 30 nicks.
Cost:
1) 2 phone lines = $50 per month
2) 2 cheap computers = $1000 or $83 per month amortized over 12 months
3) 5 dial up ISPs = $(Free with Netzero)
4) 10 online accounts = Free
5) 5 fake id’s = $? Depending upon your connections or hacking ability
6) 5 PO Boxes = $40 per month
7) 5 bank accounts = $50 per month
Total monthly costs = about $223 or say $250 per month per player
Each player goes online with 2 of his nicks, keeping track of who’s on first etc. You calculate the possible combinations with 30 different nicks. Every 3 weeks or so, cash out a nick or two and start fresh. You get 6 chairs at any table seeing 12 cards instead of 2. You also know if the hand is live, a benefit only found in stud, now transferred to hold-em. Lets recalculate the odds:
1 out after the flop = 1/36 as compared to 1/46
2 outs = 2/35 as compared to 2/45
3 outs = 3/34 as compared to 3/44
8 outs = 8/29 as compared to 8/39
etc. You get the picture
Now you don’t need to be a particularly sophisticated mathematical genius to see the possibilities here. You are a huge favorite when your hand is live and you simply play tight. A tight game appears way looser when the odds are more favorable. Maybe Mr. Sklansky can create a new starting hand chart for interested parties.
“It is doubtful if most low limit players who attempt to collude would be knowledgeable enough to do so in a manner which is quite effective yet subtle enough to escape notice upon examination.”
Why is that doubtful? You think low limit players are uneducated? You think only high limit players were in line when the brains were handed out? You think the criminal or amoral mind is necessarily the oxygen deprived at birth mind? Nonsense, and the implication is insulting. I know one player with an IQ of 147 that plays low limit only.
“If they were both expert players and expert colluders, they would naturally gravitate towards higher limits”
Why gravitate to the higher limits? 5-10 is all the higher you need to go to reap substantial profits. Move to the higher limits and there are fewer games, more sophisticated competition and higher scrutiny. It would be a “stupid criminal” act to show up regularly in 10-20 or higher game with the above business plan. The costs are so low, why risk it? The safest place to play honest poker may be the higher limits. But then you are in another “snake pit” from which you may not recover.
Why do I think this is going on? It is too easy and too cheap not to. If you had the above advantage over the other players in live play, would you be confident? Would you quit your job and play 8 hours per day? Is it illegal? I’m not sure about that, but I don’t think so. Is it amoral? Yes, but big deal. You know anyone that takes every advantage they can? Do I need hand histories to prove it? Nope, the plan is too simple to believe that people aren’t doing it. You would be able to pick those hand histories apart if I did because it is barely detectable and ultimately debatable. Can I cover my nut of $250 per month playing low limit online poker? If I can’t what have I lost? My bet is yes I can. What if lightning strikes and I get caught? Banishment…..and immediate replacement. Maybe the Costa Rican authorities will knock on my PO Box.
Paradise knows the specific computer you log on with. Two totally different accounts with different ISP's from the same computer would show up as being on the same computer. Paradise security is actually pretty sophisticated IMO, from what little info. I've gathered.
So you are convinced it is going on in a widespread manner because you think it is too easy for it not to be happening. Just the type of thinking that gets guys caught, like you would have been caught if you had tried to implement this scheme (hypothetically speaking of course, no offense intended).
The implication you think is insulting is not really so upon closer examination. Someone does not have to be stupid to not be capable of playing at an expert level and further colluding at an expert level, and doing so in a manner to avoid detection. Yes there are quite a number of intelligent good players at lower limits but almost all of the best eventually move up. David Sklansky once posted a few questions regarding what is the theoretically correct play in certain given situations if collusion were to be utilized. The answers to these questions from some of the best and brightest poker minds on this forum were very poor indeed. Someone with an IQ over 170 got them wrong and so did practically everyone else. This clearly demonstrated (to me, at least) that expert collusion is indeed far, far more difficult than expert play and requires a great deal of specialized knowledge. Colluding in an undetectable manner is harder yet still, especially when the hand histories and stats are being sifted by Paradise Security programs. Furthermore, both players and certain individual computers have both been banned by Paradise, and in at least one publicized case involving suspected credit card fraud and collusion, an account was seized as well. So it is not nearly as simple as you imagine it to be. If you don't have anything beyond such conjectures to go on, it brings us back to my point, which is that certainly it is going on to some extent, but the question is whether that extent is enough to seriously cripple an otherwise winng player's overall performance. In my experience last year it was not so, and the volume of substantial winners who are also known excellent players seemed to suggest the same, but perhaps things have changed by now...as I said before, I wouldn't know.
Facts, together with a bit of conjecture is fine, but basing one's opinions on almost pure conjecture due to lack of knowledge...I think you might want to look a little more closely at some specifics and some facts before you form such firm opinions.
I think that Paradise knows the IP address you log on with, not the specific computer. A dial up IP is dynamically generated and is different every time you log on unless you have DSL or Cable where you have a static IP. You have to play on two different tables to play from the same computer (same IP address).
In my business plan, you would use two or more different computers and two or more different ISP's to have two or more nicks at the same table. It would be absolutely undetectable.
In Your Business Plan --------------------- 7) 5 bank accounts with fake id.
Thats beyond belief. Where I come from you get put in jail for that. Not worth it!
You wouldn't have the constitution to collude would you. Criminals do much more than that without too much fear. However, it is easily worked around. Get creative and figure out a way to cash a check? Not an insurmountable problem.
That may be what you think, and that is what I previously would have thought too. But Paradise does indeed recognize the computer you are logged in from, in addition to recognizing IP addresses. Surprised? So were some others.
Interesting. If that is the case, just get out the newspaper and purchase a cheap computer for each nick. Used computers are free or at least very cheap (I normally give mine away when I upgrade as they are worthless). My office has 5 computers. My brother was in charge of 267 PCs at a large multinational corporation. They're a dime a dozen. A small hurdle, not enough to discourage your average small businessman.
Possibly, but to go to all that trouble and expense for 5/10 limit and further to invest all the time playing?!?
Just an example of one of many ways Paradise Security may be steps ahead of most would-be colluders.
I was banned for bad mouthing and I can NOT start a new account from my computer.. I have deleted cookies and reinstalled software...they still get me
WHY?? WHY???
The moral here is not to underestimate Paradise Security, and that they have probably thought of a great deal that would-be colluders haven't.
That's silly. If you think that being banned will stop someone from purchasing a new used cpu for next to nothing and going right back online then you put the techs at Paradise on too high of a pedestal. Don't care who they are or how good they are, they can be duped. As I mentioned to yesheisright, it is more likely a code implanted in the computers register.
Your argument is simply argumentative. You're grasping at straws.
As I've mentioned before, virtually your entire argument seems to be based on the idea that the existence of some degree of feasibility of collusion necessarily means that collusion exists on a widespread basis. I don't see how you can draw such a conclusion.
The problem is in your computers register. They have written a code in your register that they read when you log on. The same problem happened when people were banned from Napster. A simple deletion of the code in the reg solved it for everyone. Go on to alt.music.mp3.napster to see the solution for that one. Caution: messing with your register can disable your computer. That said, people do it successfully all the time.
As far as colluding and getting banned, just junk the computer and get another used one for $250. No great feat.
Of course there are ways around this, but that is not the point. The point is that Paradise Security has thought of much that most would-be colluders have likely not considered (as you didn't think of this when outlining your hypothetical "business plan" for colluders), and that Paradise Security is probably offering better protection (although not airtight, of course) than most players would imagine.
Chip Breaker,
I do understand that collusion is a major concern for online poker. I, as an internet poker player do feel that we can somehow minimize the amount of collusion going on. Remember, online poker is in its infancy. New techniques for spotting online colluders are being developed by many sites. Who knows, the discussion here on 2 + 2 may bring up a new way of detection.
If you think I am shill for online poker so be it. But I'd like to think we can beat or at least try to beat this problem.
Brick and mortar casinos have beat collusion. Right? (LOL).
(Yesterday I witnessed a dealer making a decision in a 5/10 game, $125 pot, in favor of his friend, where house rules dictated a different outcome. It happened so quickly and the losing player never had a chance to complain. Collusion, maybe? Do I now tell people never to play poker in a real casino? I did mention the incident to the pit boss, and he really didn't express any concern. While online poker does have its weaknesses, it definitely has its strengths too.)
what low limit games are you refeerring to? 3/6 or 5/10?
also, what r some ways to caught/ or watch out for colluders?
You said that collusion is happening all day every day. Can you post some of this collusion for us? You say everyone should quit immediately. I have been making 3 BB/hour for a long time, collusion or not. I should quit?
Are you playing .50-1? 20-40? Read the responses to stocknaces. Good luck, you'll need it.
Sammy,
Would you post some hand histories to prove you are a winning player?
Tom D
M,
You wrote, "I was shocked at one point when Paradise informed me I was seeing about 25% of the flops,..."
And in another post, you wrote, "I think I asked them for some other basic data, like # of total hands I had played, and they gave me this data as well."
I'm very curious. I can't think Paradise would have spent time computing this number when you didn't even ask for it. It sounds like they keep a profile on its customers, and percentage of flops seen is part of that profile. It seems odd, to me, that they would keep that kind of information automatically available. For what purpose do they need that kind of information?
Tom D
I have no idea, but my guess is that it would be relatively trivial for them to sift and store such data. In fact what actually happened, now that I think about it some more, was that I asked them the number of hours I had played. They replied that they did not have that data, but instead provided me with the number of hands played, % of flops seen, and net results.
Maybe such data helps them model rake structure or is useful in other ways. Maybe too, it could even help them detect collusion; for instance, if Joe Blow's playing habits shifted markedly only when he happened to be at the same table with Joe Schmoe.
Referring to Paradise's tracking of percentage of flops seen for each of its customers, you said, "Maybe such data helps them model rake structure or is useful in other ways."
I think you're on to something. I refer you to a post by Wake up CALL, February 26, 2001. He stated, "Secondly, I do not know if the project has been finished at paradise but we were building code for sensing the hands being played by the new accounts and compare them to a index of profitable starting hands. If the account plays indexed to be tight it will give out more good starting hands with bad flop types to favor the gamblers to extract maximum rake."
Good insight.
Tom D
I play tight and see no evidence of this at all Tom.
William
will,how long have you played at paradise.
I have played almost 1200 hours over the past 8 months (I need to get a life). I play quite a bit, but I have not seen the type of bias that Tom described. I will readily admit that there is something different about online poker. I am averaging about 1.5 BB with a standard deviation of about 12 BB, which is less than I would have expected given my live experience. Before playing on Paradise I played for about a year on Planet and left them because of constant connection problems. I have been told that Planet is now much more reliable, so I will probably go back and give them another try because I believe the games are a bit softer at Planet.
I cannot fully account for the difference between live and online, but I am sure there is a difference. Who knows, maybe I would be making 3 BB per hour rather than 1.5 if there were not for online collusion. I do not think collusion accounts for the whole difference I have observed, but I am sure there is some collusion on most, if not all, Internet poker sites.
William
Can anyone produce a hand history that shows some of the widespread collusion?
Can anyone produce a hand history that shows some of the widespread collusion?
Good luck! It’s like trying to ask for tangable evidence of UFOs.
Bob, there are a few points in your post, which at least to me, do not make sense. Is it really as easy as picking money off of a tree to make 100 grand a year by colluding at Paradise? Could you please tell me specifically what colluding strategies are so extremely safe and effective and exactly what the increase in expected value would be by using such strategies because I have some doubts about that rather extraordinary claim.
There are many of us who maintain that it’s complicated and difficult to successfully collude and that most efforts to do so will fail. As a student of the sciences, you can appreciate the necessity for tangible and verifiable evidence to back up grandiose claims, especially claims which call into question other people’s character.
Also, could you please publish actual evidence of collusion, not just speculation stating that it must be so simply because you lost. You state that you are well studied in theory and have had success playing in live games. Maybe so, but this is no guarantee that you will easily beat Paradise Poker for whatever reason. Although I can easily beat the 10/20 games in Las Vegas, there is another 10/20 game in a different Nevada town where I struggle. It happens.
There are many credible people who state that they can, and are, beating Paradise by playing good poker and without resorting to collusion. I think the burden of providing actual evidence is on you. Tell me again how easy it is to make 100 thousand a year by colluding at Paradise? Please provide specific card theory and mathematical detail.
I get pretty tired of people demanding scientific proof to refute an obvious possibility. If you as a scientific mind cannot conceive of a system of collusion that is effective, then you have a cramped imagination. It seems very simple to me, effective, and low cost. $100,000 per year may well be an exaggeration but the profits for low-level collusion would nonetheless be substantial and worthwhile.
Lets put the shoe on the other foot. Prove to the poker community that collusion does not exist and if it does, is performed by undernourished oxygen deprived monkeys that cannot tie their own shoes much less formulate a criminal/amoral play to take your money. You cannot prove that is doesn’t exist. The less competent colluders have been caught and they are the tip of the iceberg. They have learned from their mistakes and they are back, fortified with the knowledge of what it takes to not get caught.
Speculation? Yes. Wild speculation? No. The fact is, the loophole is there and someone is jumping through it. You don’t think so? Prove it.
Neither of the above points are addressing the crux of the matter. The question is not whether collusion exists (it does), but whether it exists at a level to seriously cripple an otherwise winning player's expectation over a meaningful period of time. Speculation does nothing to address this question.
I get pretty tired of people demanding scientific proof to refute an obvious possibility. If you as a scientific mind cannot conceive of a system of collusion that is effective, then you have a cramped imagination. It seems very simple to me, effective, and low cost. $100,000 per year may well be an exaggeration but the profits for low-level collusion would nonetheless be substantial and worthwhile.
Conceiving of something being theoretically possible is one thing, but actually finding it in play is very different.
Where is the evidence of all this collusion being so profitable? I disagree and think it would be very complicated and usually unprofitable. Where is the evidence that it is actually taking place? I've examined thousands of hands and I just don't see it. Maybe I'm and idiot. Please do me a favor and point it out to me. Please don't take me wrong; I respect your views, but I very much disagree.
Lets put the shoe on the other foot. Prove to the poker community that collusion does not exist and if it does, is performed by undernourished oxygen deprived monkeys that cannot tie their own shoes much less formulate a criminal/amoral play to take your money. You cannot prove that is doesn’t exist. The less competent colluders have been caught and they are the tip of the iceberg. They have learned from their mistakes and they are back, fortified with the knowledge of what it takes to not get caught.
There are two issues make your request untenable:
A. You're asking me to prove a negative and that's not reasonable. Prove to me that God doesn't exist. Prove to me that John Elway doesn't beat his wife. Prove to me that the competition I play against in live games doesn't cheat me either. See, you can't prove a negative.
B. I'm not the one making the grandiose and inflammatory claims. The burden of proof is not on me.
Speculation? Yes. Wild speculation? No. The fact is, the loophole is there and someone is jumping through it. You don’t think so? Prove it.
See A and B above.
Recalculate the odds after the flop knowing 15 cards instead of 5. You like em better? I sure do. Now calculate your outs after seeing if your hand is live. Do you have to do anything immortal to play good tight poker with the added knowlege? Would your play show up as odd or unexpected in low limit no foldem? I don't think so. Lets hear from Mr. Sklansky or Mr. Malmuth about the EV a decent player with this advantage would have. The advantage would be huge over the long haul. Vegas has done a pretty good busines using a small statistical advantage over the long haul. Why wouldn't that work here? Do odds work only for them?
You are correct, you cannot prove a negative. But the adept colluder would not show outragous play at low level holdem. Don't waste your time.
"I disagree and think it would be very complicated and usually unprofitable."
Where is your proof? What do you call complicated? How can it possibly be "unprofitable". At least explain why an obvious odds advantage by knowing more cards than your opponent has such a negative EV over standard odds.
By the way, how did you get the italics in your post?
Yea, ok. I wholeheartedly agree that knowing 15 cards instead of 5 would give me a tremendous advantage. However, my head spins when I try to figure out how to log in using a total of three computers, play at the same tables undetected and still maintain correct play. I think it's quite a logistical challenge and I don't believe I've seen groups like that gather consistently at any of my tables. But still, you've got a very good point and it’s worth considering.
Putting italics or other html text attributes into a 2P2 post is not hard. Use these opening and closing html tags, but remove my + signs:
<+i+> and <+/i+> for italics
<+b+> and <+/b+> for bold
I'll bet other html tags would work too.
If you wish to quote a previous post, enclose their text in the opening and closing tags like this:
<+i+>(Cardshark) I would rather play with a table full of professionals than play with a bunch of idiots who are always calling me down to the river and sucking out on me. At least I know where the professionals are coming from bla, bla, bla...<+\i+>
(You) If you can't beat a table full of calling stations then you certainly can't beat a table full of professionals...
When you post your message, the html browser will not display the opening and closing tags but will instead display the enclosed text as italicized. In the above examples, it was necessary for me to put + signs in these tags so they would display in this message (hey, I'm too lazy to look up escape characters) but for people reading these instructions, you must insert your tags free of any + characters.
It doesn't hurt to experiment because the 2P2 preview window lets you preview your work where you can see the results of your tags before you post.
On a related post, I'll bet you anything that PP is able to record your MAC address if you have a network card. That's a 48-bit hexadecimal number that's burned into every NIC that's ever been built and I think it's in the modems too. On a network, it's enclosed in every TCP/IP packet that's sent and it uniquely identifies each individual computer. It's also splattered all over your hard drive and Microsoft has in the past encoded it into the documents that were created in MS Office. It's one more reason why almost anything that you do on your computer is not truly anonymous.
Good luck!
Thanks for the html help. I appreciate it.
As for the 2 or 3 computers, that's simply management 101. I have my laptop on one side of my desk and my desktop on the other. I use them simultaneously in my daily work and I know others who use several computers daily. Again, you are not dealing with a bunch of monkeys with typewriters. These guys are smart and sophisticated. 3 guys with two computers each mixing up the nicks can fly undetected for quite a while. They'd be looking at 15 cards to your 5. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to win money with those stacked odds. Your play doesn't even have to be fully stellar to take advantage of the increased advantage. The advantage is so large, you can fumble a few.
It is scary as hell. I don't need to have solid proof that this type of collusion exists to stop bleeding online. Isn't the gist of poker knowing and playing the odds? +EV? The numbers are there. Without doing the math, and all other things being equal, your disadvantage going against these "players" has to be the worst bet in gambling. Roulette, craps, keno, even the big wheel are probably better. I play poker because I can create an advantage over another human and exploit it. I can play the tightest most agressive game against colluders and still get my hat handed to me.
Chip,
Hang in there. You've got all the Paradise damage control people scrambling. I think they're ready to put in the second team to give M and stocksnaces a blow.
Tom D
You mean they are actually paying attention? Why hasn't anybody else exposed this basic idea? How about I do it and see if they can find me. Anyone want to play? I need 2 volunteers willing to invest $250 per month for a year. I don't know, kind of steep. Might have to play two computers. Don't know if I can do that, least of all find 2 other guys with a bad streak who know how to play competent poker and have a modest skill at the computer.
On the other hand, we could charge a huge (?) fee for the detective work. Kind of a "secret shopper"? Fast food restaurants hire "secret shoppers" to test the employee performance in stores when the manager isn't there. They get free sandwiches. Think they'd buy my idea?
LOL, but I'm not a shill for PP. If fact, I've been a member of the poker on line community for several years and have attended the last 5 BARGE's.
I remember the BARGE three years ago listening to David and Mason lecture at the horseshoe and one of the topics was collusion. They pointed out that it would be very difficult to pull it off successfully and in my opinion, I believe that also would true for games at Paradise Poker.
Lets put the shoe on the other foot. Prove to the poker community that collusion does not exist...
Whoops! Did someone blow off their critical thinking homework?
"There are many credible people who state that they can, and are, beating Paradise by playing good poker and without resorting to collusion."
There is an even larger group (Ed Hill, Nolan Dalla) that believe Paradise is a crooked as a dogs hind leg. They are often dismissed. I'm begining to believe that many of the Paradise defenders have significant interest in discrediting them. Be they simple cheats or winning players, they seem to be well motivated to defend this virtually unknown and lawless entity.
I do not know what Nolan Dalla had to say, but Ed Hill recently stated that the cards he analyzed were randomly distributed and he indicated that his concern with Paradise was collusion between the players, not Paradise itself cheating. At least that is how I understood what he was saying. He may have accused Paradise of cheating at some time in the past, but, if such a post exists, I was probably before I started visiting this site.
William
I think your statement would be shown to be false if you polled only highly skilled players instead of the general poker playing community. As I mentioned before, last year David Sklansky accumulated a list of perhaps 30 people or more who were big winners on Paradise and many of these are known top-notch players.
You listed two people in your "larger" group. I doubt if most top-notch players would completely side with Ed Hill on this matter if indeed they have an opinion at all.
It is also far from established that the general poker community agrees with you either. What you tend to have on the internet, especially on a public forum, is a magnification of negatives. This occurs because people with negative things to post are more likely to post than someone who is simply somewhat satisfied and doesn't care much.
"What you tend to have on the internet, especially on a public forum, is a magnification of negatives. This occurs because people with negative things to post are more likely to post than someone who is simply somewhat satisfied and doesn't care much."
I've kept my eye open for the magnified negative response to Planet Poker and it just never comes. I wonder why? Solve that and you'll solve the whole puzzle.
Secondly, Sklansky has an (minor) interest in the success of Paradise and his list was nameless. Worthless stuff, if you ask me.
Simply because the game is played much faster and against more unfamiliar players. When you play at a much faster rate, you take a much higher average number of beats per hour. This can be very unsettling psychologically and it will seem like it happens far more than it should compared to live play.
I have only played a little at Planet and truth be told I showed some relatively small losses there. I quit playing there primarily because of the disconnect rate and because I didn't care for the graphics, and because losing in general leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I also had the impression that the games at Paradise tended to be tighter and more aggressive than at any other site. IMO this roughly equals "tougher." It was my first exposure to being pressured so often from so many different sides. For players unused to this, it will seem disorienting and a bit nutty. It will also likely cost them money until they properly adjust. I had quite a learning curve playing online and especially at Paradise. My online style evolved and my results improved from losing little at first for a short time, to winning at a very modest rate (for a longer time), to winning at a very significant rate(for about the same time). As mentioned before, early this year in perhaps half a dozen sessions I lost back about 10% of my net online winnings from last year, felt the games weren't as good as before, started to worry slightly about Pokerspot's ability to pay based on chat I had heard while playing (I was lucky, getting my winnings out a few weeks before the S#!* hit the fan), and turned my attentions elsewhere. Perhaps losing back some of my profits motivated this decision too; there is something about losing online that makes one feel so very powerless, much more so than in a casino. I don't know why this might be.
I guess I merged two sentences in the above post. It was late last year that I heard unsettling comments made in the chat box at Pokerspot about their possible cash flow problems and I got my winnings out just before the holidays. The games there had toughened up a bit as well and I had just lost back some of my profit. I guess I got quite lucky in that sense.
You wrote, "Simply because the game is played much faster and against more unfamiliar players. When you play at a much faster rate, you take a much higher average number of beats per hour. This can be very unsettling psychologically and it will seem like it happens far more than it should compared to live play."
This is simply fallacious. In fact, there was research done many years ago on gambling stress. The researchers wanted to measure the correlation between risk and stress, so they hooked up wires to some poker players and had them play poker. The only time the needles measured stress was when someone slowed the game down.
Players want as many hands per hour as possible. If that weren’t the case, hold’em never would have caught on. I doubt the good players were saying, “My god, I don’t want to play hold’em, I can’t take the increased number of hands per hour". Nobody cares how many beats he averages in an hour. He should be averaging more wins per hour, too. If a $10 an hour player wins $20 an hour because of the increased speed, is he going to quit because he can’t take it? Pardon me, but that's ridiculous. I change tables, if I can, when the game I'm in has too many slow players, no matter how badly they play.
What is it Roy Cooke says all the time? "Volume times edge equals earn", I think.
You might want to come up with some other explanation for why Paradise "seems" weird.
Tom D
Of course the math says one thing and it is right. I don't think it is inaccurate to say that many players find bad beats unsettling, however, and taking twice as many bad beats per hour may be very unsettling to some folks and feel foreign compared to what they are used to.
M,
Why do you post?
Tom D
So people like you won't get bored.
does anybody know the 800 no. to rama?????
Sure, Tim, it's 888-817-7262
fyi. paradise has a new holdem game featuring only fold and raise options using play money. the game has lots of action you could only imagine...
$10 tournament. 5 Handed, playing 400/800.
SB (Player A) is allin for 160, BB (B)is almost allin for 560, under the gun (C) has a mere 110, 4th seat (D)has 3,670, and i have 3,500 on the button (E).
As expected C folds hoping that both blinds will be eliminated this hand. D raises to 800, somewhat unusually as the blinds are in a very unfavouable situation, and he and i could have called and checked down.
I have KcQc and decide after some time to call for 800, and look at the flop, as if i hit, i might cripple D, and hold almost all the chips, and if i miss i still have 2,700 chips when the others have almost nothing except D.
B folds as this will allow him to start the next hand allin on the SB with more chips than C will on the BB.
Flop comes AcJc4c. I have flopped the nut flush, and am looking to grab as many chips as i can. D bets the flop, possibly looking for information, and i raise hoping he will think i am trying for a free card. D reraises and i call, keeping the free card illusion alive.
Turn ruins my trap with the 8c. 4 clubs on the board and player D checks to me. I bet 800, and he deliberates for a while and then calls. A flush draw is a slim possibility as he put in 3 bets on the flop, with me hloding both the nuts and 2nd nuts. Add to that the fact he checked and called the turn makes me think he he must have hit the flop hard, with either a set, or Aces up being very likely.
River comes Ah and D bets into me enough to put me allin for my last 700. If he loses this leaves him with next to nothing, and a very good chance of going from chip lead and almost certain 1st or 2nd placing to a risk of not being in the money.
The pot is now 6,860 chips. If i call and lose to a full house on the river, as i concluded from the action on the flop and turn is the most likely scenario, I exit in 4th spot, getting nothing. If i call and win i have 7,560 chips and have pretty much guaranteed myself first spot. If I fold now it is down to 4 players as the small blind is almost certainly eliminated, and the two small stacks will be allin on the next hand, guaranteeing me at least 3rd, and a good shot at 2nd.
In any other spot this is a automatic call. However, 4th spot pays nothing, so I decide to fold my flush, and the bastard had but a very good play on me and shows AdTc to eliminate the allin player.
Thankfully the next hand he passes to me and i call both of the allin blinds bets with pocket Jacks, and secure 2nd place and $30 on the very next hand. Even if i had lost that hand i would have had 3rd, and had more chips left over to try and grab 2nd.
Sorry about the lenght of this, but what would you do?
Very well played at every step of the way. You may have made a mistake by calling preflop. Seat D was clearly raising to signal to you to fold, so he could take the blinds on on his own. However with 5 players in KQs is a very good hand and you can't throw them all away all the time.
The decision to fold the river was i'm sure incredibly tough. However, under those extreme circumstances, and the reasoning you gave as to what you thought your opponent had, and the fact you thought this BEFORE the Ace fell on the river, means that it was a very well thought out laydown.
Pity about the result but you did the right thing and secured 2nd spot and the cash.
Tough laydown. I think this play depends on the player. A smart player would only bet the full house into you so it is an easy laydown. An idiot would bet the A,A,A with the 10.
If this guy played well and I knew him I would lay it down. Against most players in PP tourneys I would have to call it. If you were guaranteed third it is a different story. However, you are not there yet and it is important to realize that a tiny stack can double a few times and place in the money (I have seen it happen many times). Also, your stack is not much better and you can only run through one BB and SB and you can only play one hand unless you win.
Can't argue with your decision though.
I can't believe how many players in these PP tournies will not check it down against an all in player. I don't think this guy made a good move on you at all. Since he was already guaranteed first or second, why would you risk this move? If you had called he looks like an absolute idiot...
If he had done what was proper... there wouldn't be a chance that the all-ins win anything here. Against this type of guy if you call before the flop check call the whole way even with the nuts. You can eliminate the all-ins and you don't risk as many chips, but when you win it is still devastating.
Derrick
I fold pre-flop. To me its not even a question. Why get into a battle with the big stack?
I re-raise on the flop. The pot is big enough. Take it down now. When he raises and you have both the KcQc he usually has atleast 2 pair or a set.
On the river, I curse and swear and throw in my final chips hoping I don't see a full house.
Ken Poklitar
You're there to WIN. Who cares about a measly third place. If you win this hand you have a good chance of taking it all, not to mention the odds of you having the best hand here are pretty good.
What he did to you was employ the perfect PP tourney strategy when the field if five and four handed. I have been winning a these lately because people get so timid when it's five and four handed that you can rob them blind. Try playing a couple tourneys where you really open the throttle when it's five handed. You'll be surprised. I survive by blind-stealing alone sometimes. I don't make a single hand but I steal enough blinds to make it to the money.
natedogg
I think the biggest mistake is getting invloved in the first place. Then when he doesnt check down he is making the mistake.
However, if you know the player, you fold here. You made logical assumptions to what he had, and if you fold all is not lost.
You are practically guranteed 3rd by hanging around. Two players are guaranteed allin next hand. I don't know if i would have, depends on who the player was
I'm under the gun with AcAs, button makes it 3 bets, small blind calls and i cap it.
Flop is AhKd6c i bet out. I figure I'm either going to get lots of action or none at all. Button raises BB calls i reraise and capped by button with BB calling.
Turn is 8d and capped again with all 3 players in.
River is 4s and BB checks i bet buttons raises, BB reraises and i cap it. I show my trip Aces, button groans and shows AK, then BB rolls over 5c7s for the nut straight.
Everyone starts hassling this guy in the chat box, and i quietly seethe.
How can a guy call that betting preflop, and then continue requiring runner runner for the straight?
Some people will never learn.Hey, do like chris ALger and always raise with K-10o in late position, and then you will become a millionaire!
Thats the only explanation as far as im concerned. He was hacking into the paradise server and he knew what was coming.
I just played an almost identical hand (except I had trip Js). No way someone calls all those bets. Also, in my case another guy was betting it up only to drop on the river. Hm....
I recorded the hand and was thinking about reporting it to PP. The only thing was I saw the guy play crap almost every hand and he ended up losing a ton.
Also had a guy call 3 bets preflop with 10,7o in a live game over the weekend. Of course he cracked my flopped straight on the river.
People will play garbage.
And you have never sat at a live table and lost to some bozo with crap hitting runner/runner? I have played 10-20 and had players play crap and hit runner/runner with no apparent draw on the flop.
Why does every bad beat on-line need to be caused by someone cheating?
Ken Poklitar
Because the owners remain anonymous in order to avoid civil litigation. Until the ownership reveals themselves, and opens their operations to public inspection, they should be considered corrupt.
Look I don't doubt there is collusion going on. I just really have a tough time believing Paradise is cheating it's own customers.
Let me tell you my own bad beat story. The 2nd night I am playing I play some 5-10 hold'em. I lose to a straight flush ( I have the apparent nut flush), quads and set over set. Plus on another hand that I folded on the flop, I would have hit runner runner royal flush.
So I think to myself, wow that is weird. But why would paradise try to cheat me on my 2nd night? Is it strange, sure. Is it cheating, I doubt it.
Ken Poklitar
who took this view.
I am up a small fortune playing on-line; I will leave out the name of the site so as not to be branded a shill. Also, I can't say with absolute certainty that cheating is not a major problem. I would be SHOCKED to find out that there are NO "teams"; I operate under the same assumption as in live play.
1. There is (regretably) some cheating going on.
2. It is a relatively small problem and one that I will have to learn to live with if I am going to play poker against people I have never met. It is very hard to come up with a precise definition for "relatively small". I have come to the conclusion that a winning player who is capable of earning $50,000 per year is probably losing less than a week's pay to cheating. Even if it were exactly a weeks pay it is a figure I can (and do) choose to live with. This figure applies to live AND on-line play, although I will admit that it is PROBABLY more of a problem on-line. I don't think it is the fact that you are less likely to get caught on-line that leads to this; if the site is even slightly reputable it is likely EASIER to get caught. Nor do I believe it is the fact that the penalties are less severe. (If you cheat on-line, all they can do is keep your money. There are far worse things that can happen to you if you are caught in live play, and jail may often be the least of your worries.) I have come to believe that it is harder - even for people with small consciences - to cheat someone when you have to look them in the eye while doing it.
I look at the amount of my winnings that wind up in the pockets of the "bad guys" as an additional rake. As long as it is an amount I can live with I give it very little thought.
I keep meticulous records of my results at the table; this includes all expenses due to transportation and lodging. I keep these records for two reasons. I DO pay my taxes (maybe not on every dime I earn, but on the lion's share of it), AND to see "how I'm doing". I guess there are actually 3 reasons; I like to be able to see what expenses are eating up more of the revenue than they should.
Since I bagan "taking it seriously" I have earned just over $200,000 in pure profit. I choose not to say how much time it took to reach this figure, but I will say that I am not yet ready to "quit my day job. Plus I have the luxury of playing in a weekly private game in which it is close to impossible to lose - so those of you reading this should not get too envious (nor would you be well advised to beg for lessons. - LOL)
My expenses as a whole have taken almost exactly HALF.
That's right, HALF. Call it 50% if you prefer; it boils down to the same number. Included in this figure are the following:
1. Transportation - there are no cardrooms within less than a 2 hour drive. (I live in NYC; AC is closest but Connecticut is only a little farther.)
2. Lodging - if I am alone (or with friends) we will stay almost anywhere; it's just a place to sleep. If I am with my wife I stay in a nicer place, BUT I then deduct part of the amount spent as "unrelated" (for my records - come tax time "the Hilton was the only place available, sir - all the other places were sold out. =)
3. RAKE (or time) and TOKES - I am not suggesting that I be allowed to play rake-free and to not toke, BUT if these costs did not exist the 200K I referred to would be more than 300. ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS !!!
That is way more than half of the total amount of what it costs me to play; it comes very close to 2/3. Bear in mind that east-coast poker has outrageously high rakes in low and middle limit games. It isn't until you get to 30-60 that the fee for playing comes close to being reasonable, but I almost never stray higher than 15-30. (15-30 is a rake game in Connecticut - $4 on almost all pots. It's nice to be [almost] the only game in town.)
ONLINE EXPENSES - - -
I have won just over $20,000 since I started keeping records.
Advantages:
1. Lower rake - if there were no rake my winnings would only be about 20% higher since the rake on-line is so much smaller. It costs $1 to win a $30 pot on-line; it costs THREE DOLLARS in a cardroom and that's only if you opt not to tip the dealer. THAT IS A MAJOR DIFFERENCE; if I'd won the entire 200 thousand dollars on-line, I would have well over 50 thousand more of it in my pocket.
2. Game speed - average # of hands per hour in a cardroom is ~ 25 at the lower limits and ~ 30 at 10-20 and 15-30. More hands equals more profit.
The other advantages are not economic but they still exist. They consist of things like convenience and the like, but they are probably off-set completly by other factors of a similar nature such as lack of social interaction, etc.
The (financial) disadvantages of playing on-line are:
1. While there are still alot of bad players, the number of truly clueless people SEEMS to be smaller. Other than this I would say that the average on-line player is a LITTLE better but this is more than made up for by getting to play close to TWICE as many hands. Most on-line games yield well over 50 hands per hour regardless of the limit.
2. No tells - there is nothong more to be said about this. Then again, they can't see me either so it may even be to my advantage; reading faces was never the strongest part of my game.
3. There is almost certainly more cheating; I don't think it's alot more but I do believe there is more.
4. I WOULD NEVER CONSIDER PLAYING IN THE BIGGER GAMES ON-LINE. 5-10, 6-12 THAT IS AS HIGH AS I WILL GO. At these stakes it is almost not worth the time of the average person to partake in anything unethical. I'm sure I have been cheated even at 3-6 by a team who just wanted to see if they could but I don't think it has happened very many times.
BOTTOM LINE:
If money were the only factor I would probably never play anywhere but on-line. I was the person who posted anonomously some time ago on the "general theory" forum claiming to be averaging well over 3 big bets per hour at 3-6; since then things have been going even better (only a little better, but better). It has not been a "lucky streak" - if it has been it is the longest lucky streak in the history of gambling.
AND I'M SURE SOME OF THE MONEY THAT RIGHTFULLY BELONGS TO ME SITS IN THE POCKET(S) OF THE AFOREMENTIONED "BAD GUYS".
Would anyone out there like to suggest that I quit ?
While I'm at it why don't I stop working entirely since IMO taxes are too high - that would really set those who run our country back on the seat of their pants. (It really would if enough people joined me.)
Nah, I think I'll keep my job.
I think I'll keep playing on-line as well.
Best wishes,
- J D -
I really need to learn how to post replies where they are intended to go.
Sorry for any confusion...
- J D -
Had almost identical hand at PP over the weekend. AA, flopped a set, lost to runner runner flush. Makes you wonder. But had best winning session that day, too.
Papio
Yep, they stay to hear all the numbers called off in the bingo game, and guess what.....BINGO!
There is a similar post from a 20/40 player at the Commerce Club in L.A. One off from the button he made it three bets with A,A. Button cold calls. Flop is an Ace and two medium cards (8,9 I believe). Flop is bet early and AA raises. Button calls. Turn is a 3. Checked to AA and he bets. Button calls. River is a 5. Checked to AA and he bets. Button raises! Other players fold. AA calls. Button turns over 4,2.
what the actual odds against these draws coming in are.
A player who draws to - and hits - a runner/runner flush draw has done something that he had better than a 4% chance of doing. In other words he was less than a 25-1 underdog.
The straight draw in your post had approximately a 1.6% chance of hitting - translation just about a 60-1 shot.
- If the 4,2 was suited and there was one of that suit on the flop it was in the neighborhood of a 20-1 shot. (I am assuming that the flush would have won as long as the board didn't pair.)
I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO WIN SHOULD DRAW TO THESE HANDS ! ! !
The players who do make these draws are the ones that allow the winners to win and they should be thanked for playing this way.
It's just that players who get "victimized" by these draws seem to behave (and I think some of them BELIEVE) like their opponent just hit a thousand-to-one shot.
A player who goes after a draw with a 5% chance is going to miss 19 times out of 20, but when he hits let's not compare it to hitting the lottery. Every time you walk past a crap table and see the shooter throw a "12" you have witnessed a 35-1 shot occur, yet nobody seems to react with the shock you see when a holdem player hits a draw that was almost TWICE as likely to hit.
More importantly, if someone was going to cheat I do not think they would do it in this manner. It reminds me of the movie THE CINCINNATTI KID. If the last hand was rigged - well then neither of those involved were very bright. There are so many other ways to do it that don't attract attention.
Not long ago I raised with pocket Queens before the flop. The flop came Jack-high with no REAL draws so I was pretty sure I had the best hand. (J 7 2 rainbow, I think.)
On the turn another 2 came - checked to me, I bet and get called in 3 places but not check-raised so now I'm SURE I have the best hand. River is a Queen.
All of a sudden a war breaks out; when the smoke clears I wind up beating out 77, A2, and (I'm serious) QUEEN-DEUCE.
Who took the worst beat here ?
Better question, why did they ALL wait until they had been "run down" to start raising ?
Granted, I was not going to throw my hand away for a raise, but if it had come to me bet, raised and re-raised on the turn I WOULD folded without hesitation.
This is how you "set someone up"; you give them a hand that is the best and you stack the deck so that the river helps a player who can claim he "belonged" in the pot.
You do NOT arrange for a player to flop a set and get it cracked by someone who calls raises to draw to a runner-runner staight.
NOT EVERY LONGSHOT DRAW THAT COMES IN IS THE RESULT OF A STACKED DECK (or in the case of on-line poker, a faulty "server").
- And as unthinkable as it may be to a skilled player to draw to a 20-1 shot when he is getting odds of less than half than that, it is what it is, a 20-1 shot.
HE DID NOT TOSS A COIN IN THE AIR AND GET IT TO LAND ON IT'S EDGE.
Think about it and you might start to become less paranoid in regard to your on-line beats.
You might even (gulp!) begin to understand that the beats you take in live games are not the "miracles" they appear to be.
Longshots ? - YES !
Miracles ? - NO !
-----Best wishes,
J D
P.S. If you are ahead when the flop comes down in a multi-way pot and four or more players stick around to see the turn you are seldom more than a 3-1 favorite to win the hand. In fact, you are rarely this much of a favorite over the field AS A WHOLE, even though you may be a huge favorite over each of your opponents as individuals.
If you are unable to grasp this fact - not everyone is a "math geek" - you had better get someone who is to explain this concept to you. If you don't, you will have a hard time keeping your sanity in the low-limit "nofoldem" games. No matter how well you play you will find the frustration factor too much to cope with.
- And once you let it "get to you", you're finished.
No amount of skill is enough if you are so "dizzy" you cannot even see straight.
Trust me - I speak from experience. (LOL)
I'm not seriously suggesting that any cheating occured. And i've fallen victim to runner, runner before when the guy was taking easily the worst of it. But this time he was drawing to a runner, runner straight, with betting capped on every round. Thats worse than bad poker, it's abysmal.
all you are saying is "but this is a really, really, bad beat..." - as if one-upping it makes the lesson any different - you are not listening to what JD has told you. His is excellent advice. I recently played a 5-10 on line and watched someone enter every (and I mean every) hand. He worked his bankroll up to around $600 from $100 and layed some stupendous bad beats on people flipping over miracle after miracle hit on the river after calling 1st pre-flop raises. Eventually, percentages caught up with him and he lost it all - bought in again for $200 - lost that - bought in again for $144 and lost that. Percentages mean that .0001% chances will happen eventually, not never. Monkeys at a typewriter will eventually type War and Peace. You cannot play low limit games without patience.
Thanks for the insight JD.
People also don't seem to realize that the deal is not "right" at Paradise Poker. When the site first opened you would never get just one pocket pair, you would get three or more pocket pairs in a row. Not sometimes, all the time. Possibly as a result, quads were a common hand. I personally got quads at least twice a day, every day, for over 3 months. Was this a long lucky streak? It wasn't all that lucky, because everyone around me was getting them too. I saw over a dozen sets of quads every day for over 3 months. I'm really not exaggerating. It seems that they have toned down that aspect of the deal, but it still doesn't seem right. There are simply too many completed hands. I believe that the longshots come more at Paradise Poker than chance could account for, and that in fact you profit by staying in pots that don't seem to offer the right odds (if there were any pots that small) because of the Paradise Effect, more longshots filled than any other site. If you don't believe it, play some heads-up holdem there. Keep track of how often neither player improves. Three hands in a row in heads-up play I was dealt a medium or large pair, all three hands I flopped top set, and yes, all three times I lost to a straight or flush. The deal at Paradise is NOT random, and you must realize this and take it into account.
I made a post in Janurary on the others forum discussing a "fish" who was playing 10-20 with half kill. This player had no clue. He started with $500. He played almost every hand. He raised with any 2 cards above a 10 or any pair. He re-raised with almost anything. It was a tough table but he ran over it and was up over 1500 before reality set in. He lost it all and bought in another 500 and went back up to 1500 before cashing out about even.
The point being is that some players do this in live games therefore there will be some players who do this on-line. So don't assume stupid players are either involved in collusion or out right cheating based on knowing the cards. I would guess that more often than not they are just stupid players who have more spare cash then the rest of us.
Ken Poklitar
I was playing live poker on Wednesday night, and the table maniac raised and reraised preflop. Flop is AK4, Maniac and reasonably solid player rock each other to the cap. Turn is 3, capped again, and river is a 3, capped again. Solid player shows AK, and maniac takes it down with 34.
My point is that all packs of cards deal out these bad beats to good players with strong cards, not just the ones at paradise as suggested by KK
I'd also posted this hand to rgp a while back...
Paradise 3-6 HE:
I'm in the cutoff with KK. Player 2 to my right (2R) open raises, player on my immediate right (IR) cold-calls. I three-bet, everyone else folds, and we take the flop 3-handed.
Flop is 8c 4s 2d, checked to me, I bet, both call.
Turn is [8c 4s 2d] 3d, putting two diamonds on the board, checked to me, both call.
River is [8c 4s 2d 3d] 6h - no flush possible, but someone holding a 5 kills me. Checked to me, I bet (awaiting the check-raise), 2R folds, IR calls.
I take it down with kings. IR had QsTs. People will bet and cold-call (and keep calling) with anything...that's just the way it is. If someone had been trying to push a bluff with JTs, maybe they start screaming that this guy could see their cards, when in reality, he's calling despite having virtually no chance to win.
1.You are not a poker god, he died in a vegas motel of a drug overdose.
2.Internet poker was thought up by someone at VISA, so you will have to pay for bad playing plus two percent a month.
3.Two games? Twice as much chance to screw up.
4.Yes, they are cheating but you are making two big bets an hour over 1000 hours, so sit in your easy chair and shut up.
5.When you think you might be better than the average player who would sit alone for an hour at a $20-$40 heads-up table with $4000, you're not.
6.If you have a problem with rage control, we have found that chicken wire placed 4 inches in front of your monitor works best.
7.Mason sometimes talks with Sklansky. Hellmuth sometimes talks with Brunson. Carson will always argue with someone.
8.If the player has a feminine sounding name, you have two less outs than you think, and eastern european four less.
9.There is no need for a poker face here. You can shout "Yipee", dance with the cat or quickly click check when you flop a set.
10.This is so much fun it should be illegal, oh, it is.
11.She's right, you play too much poker.
12.Sometimes you will hope they are cheating because it will keep you from thinking you play this bad.
13.No dealer tokes, but no floorman tokes either, so you get the decision you deserve. I hate that.
14.If you don't talk nice they cut out your tongue, and then everyone laughs at you.
15.When you have been up for two days do not e-mail support about their daily credit limits policy.
16.You can't give the railbird $20 to move along. If you don't know what a railbird is drop two limits.
17.Where else can you see someone who has complained about a live $1 five handed rake defend an up to $160/hr five handed rake at his online poker site.
18.Wiley Coyote works at support for an online poker room and uses only ACME software.
19.When you have played ten hands in a row, step away from the mouse and no one has to get hurt.
20.Noticing the small things makes you money.
MS Sunshine
ROTFLMAO!
Very well said. I especially like numbers 1 and 20.
This is what you stay up doing at night??? Jesus, your wife must be ugly.
That you are a weak player. I have played you many times and won 19 times out of 20. Keep in there Ms sunshine. You are worth more than A full time job.
If you are going to put up a post like this, at least have the decency of identifying your own internet poker handle so that if Ms. Sunshine respects your opinion, she can perhaps take steps to re-evaluate her game. BTW, I have played a little with her on Planet Poker and I certainly don't agree with your assessment. In my opinion, Ms. Sunshine quite clearly plays well.
Thank you SKP and "Can't Stand" for your staunch defense, we appreciate that. BTW, Nit, MS does indeed stand for Mississippi, but my wife plays under MS Sunshine as much or more than I do, and I'm sure it was her skp played with since he referred to the play as "good". LOL...my wife refers to me as "the leak in Sunshine's play".
Thanks for the positive replies, Mr. MS Sunshine
she's one of the names that I don't like seeing when I am looking for games on the waitlist.
Give us your handle and the site(s) you play. If we haven't done so already, we'll find the weak link in your chain. Ms. Sunshine probably already has and this is your way to build your ego back up a little. Leave this forum to those who want to help and be helped.
and the poster is indeed male.
I'm the one who referred the not so friendly so and so as an egomaniac. Yes it's obvious he is a male chovenist (sp?). And yes Ms does stand for Mississippi. I've gotten to know both thru playing the $20 game at PS and through emails. They are both fine people and players. And to you John, if you read this, you are right. But just a small leak...LOL :>)
Kind regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
#
played there brill they have pro poker players there all the time watching the tables very good
If they do.....they'd better have lots of them lined up because, from what I've seen so far, the play is so bad that the pro's that they've supposedly assigned to monitor the games are going to die of exertion from laughing!!!
If you are selling the site based on professional players monitoring the games then what are there credentials? Work experience, WSOP wins, etc...
They are NOT pro players. I know Nick and Chas, and neither of them are pro's. Ask them yourself. As for the play on that site.....it is filled with the most fish and the WORST play on about any site I have ever seen. I certainly hope you don't play for real money if you think that site is good play.......
Since when has this forum become FREE advertising for new poker sites?
If anyone works for the site they can't make these posts. However it is an 'open forum' and if we don't work there and like the site (or not like it, in the case of Paradise) we can say it.
True poker is a huge step up from other software out there, they have approached building the site very professionally, they have name pros monitoring against collusion--this is all GREAT news to 2+2 Internet players.
Go TP!
yes, please, name the pros!
Sklansky and Malmuth are two of the pros named by TP.
From the TruePoker website: "The Team: We are avid poker players and industry-leading software developers who have devoted Fortune 500 talents to creating an unmatched poker venue on the internet."
No where do I see Sklansky and Malmuth's names mentioned. If they are supervising TruePoker's games I would like them to verify it here.
Hey, I'm not knocking the site. Just hate seeing so called "posting ads" stretching the truth.
David and I are in the process of working with True Poker. We will have more to say in the future.
It is our policy to let people give their honest opinions, either positive or negative, about the different poker sites. We have on occasion asked the particular poster if they were affiliated with the site when their post did sound like like an advertisement. If they stated that they were not affiliated with the site we have taken them at their word and let the post stand. The last example of this occured with Highlands Poker.
We have also allwed poker sites to respond to criticism and/or questions about their site. For example, if someone was to ask if site ABC.poker.com spread hold 'em, we would have no objection if a spokesperson from that site was to post the limits that they spread, the number of games currently going, etc.
If you represent a particular site, and I believe you do, and you wish to advertise on our site, we would be glad to accept your money. Just email me at my email address above and I will have the appropriate information sent to you.
TruePoker claim they have taken advice from David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth in examining players' patterns for the purposes of identifying collusion.
Is this true?
David and I are in the process of working with True Poker. We will have more to say in the future.
Hi all IN light of some of the posts on here recently re:collusion. I posted about true poker. I do not work for them. I play there ,you can speak to a host at any time by simply pressing a button. I would have though that this would have been a giant leap forward,If you see or suspect something you can point it out right there and then in private. I have found the hosts to be responsive and professional. Why would people knock such a gr8 effort. Surely you would promote unless there is another motive.
pad
you must be a shill for them. Anyone with any sense can see from previous posts regarding poker web sites that there are many concerns-from not getting paid, to collusion, to questionable fire wall security. To ask why someone would knock a "great effort" when there has been so many questionable issues involving on-line poker and a slowly building negative history involving these sites, makes one think you are either blind, stupid, or a shill for the sites.
Has anyone else noticed an increase in the number of maniacs at the higher buyin tournaments at Paradise. People are reraising you with 43 off, calling preflop raises with J8 as if there was no tomorrow. What's the proper strategy to adopt? Just to play tighter? Intuitively I would think that high pairs increase in value relative to AKs, AQ and hands like that.
Does anyone have inputs? Am I imagining this?
Frode
For the past umpteen years the tournament staff at the World Series of Poker has received 35% of the toke money left by the players, by far the largest cut taken by the house in any of the large tournaments in the United States. Now, thanks to Becky Binion Behnen, the Tournament Director and his staff will receive 50% of the money, cutting deeply into what was already slim pickin's for the dealers. Why isn't anyone protesting this action??
B.L.
You need to add some HTML to y our post. Specifically, start with a PRE tag and end with a /PRE tag. Also, put a BR tag between each line. All of these tags need to have the usual open-close brackets found in html "<" and ">". I've included the quotes because otherwise the brackets get rendered.
Here's an example:
"<" PRE ">" "<"BR">" --hand history"<"BR">" --more hand history
"<"BR">" --even more history
"<"BR">" --somebody lost money
"<"BR">" -- somebody won money "<"BR">"
"<"/PRE">"
The result is as follows:
Game #46358719 - $5/$10 Hold'em - 2001/01/22-04:13:19 (CST)
Table "Aruba" (real money) -- Seat 5 is the button
Seat 1: m.zero ($262 in chips)
Seat 3: Emama ($369.50 in chips)
Seat 4: jkirky ($245 in chips)
Seat 5: Colt45 ($144 in chips)
Seat 6: skibum21 ($118 in chips)
Seat 7: TRUHYE ($196.50 in chips)
Seat 8: natedogg ($268 in chips)
Seat 9: poolshark ($139 in chips)
Seat 10: $ilver Fox ($181 in chips)
skibum21: Post Small Blind ($2)
TRUHYE : Post Big Blind ($5)
Dealing...
Dealt to natedogg [ 5c ]
Dealt to natedogg [ 3s ]
natedogg: Fold
poolshark: Fold
$ilver Fox: Fold
ONNTILT said, "thats very good"
m.zero : Raise ($10)
Emama : Fold
jkirky : Fold
Colt45 : Call ($10)
skibum21: Call ($8)
TRUHYE : Call ($5)
*** FLOP *** : [ 7d 7s Qc ]
natedogg said, "well, I gotta work tomorrow, as sad as
that is. Night all good luck"
skibum21: Check
TRUHYE : Check
m.zero : Check
Colt45 : Bet ($5)
poolshark said, "got my superbowl bet in and i figured
i would get back to the poker, i just made 900 in
under 2 hours on an 8/16 before i came here"
skibum21: Raise ($10)
TRUHYE : Call ($10)
m.zero : Fold
Colt45 : Call ($5)
*** TURN *** : [ 7d 7s Qc ] [ 9s ]
skibum21: Bet ($10)
TRUHYE : Call ($10)
m.zero said, "where are youi"
poolshark said, "i had a downfall before i got to that
table though"
Colt45 : Call ($10)
*** RIVER *** : [ 7d 7s Qc 9s ] [ Kc ]
skibum21: Bet ($10)
TRUHYE : Call ($10)
Colt45 : Fold
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $117 | Rake: $3
Board: [ 7d 7s Qc 9s Kc ]
m.zero lost $10 (folded)
Lisa29 didn't bet
Emama didn't bet (folded)
jkirky didn't bet (folded)
Colt45 lost $30 (folded)
skibum21 bet $40, collected $58.50, net +$18.50
(showed hand) [ Kh Qd ] (two pair, kings and queens)
TRUHYE bet $40, collected $58.50, net +$18.50 (showed hand)
[ Kd Qh ] (two pair, kings and queens)
natedogg didn't bet (folded) [ 5c 3s ] (a pair of sevens)
poolshark didn't bet (folded)
$ilver Fox didn't bet (folded)
natedogg
It's five handed in a 20 dollar paradise tourney. I have $3400 in chips and I'm the big blind. Limits are 400-800. UTG raises to 800. Second to act calls, button calls and the small blind calls. UTG only has 50 dollars left after raising so if I reraise he cant reraise too to limit the field to the 2 of us. Even though I have the best hand preflop I'm against 4 players. I can't remember exactly how much everyone had but it seemed pretty evident that after this hand just about everyone (except for the one that wins the pot) will be out of chips. So I folded my pocket aces, that way after this hand it will pretty much be heads up. Sure enough, I would have lost. Small blind hit a flush on the river and UTG turned a set. I ended up winning the tourney. I never thought that I would fold pocket aces !
In my opinion you played it just fine. It's what you were comfortable with. If I understand you correctly, by winning this hand you are all but guaranteed to win the tournament. However, if you lose while holding pocket Aces, then you are badly short stacked and will very likely end up in second place.
However, if you fold, you will be heads up against your opponent both holding similar chip stacks battling it out for first and second places and your odds would roughly be 1:1 at that point. According to TTH showdown, no folding Hold'em, AA will win 56% of the time against four other opponents holding random hands. Your odds probably would have been a little worse than that assuming that your opponents called with higher quality cards, but not Ax.
I guess it depends on your confidence in your heads up play. If you would rather not have it come down to that, then your best play would have been to call.
When in doubt, vote for the aces.
I can see what you were thinking: it's a sure shot at second if you just fold. One problem, however, is that if utg wins you're the chip underdog with only a guaranteed third place, a measly $20 bucks, and not even that if it's a 3-way split. If you play the hand and win, it's $80. You also didn't have to win the hand to place in the money, as you'll finish 4th only if three opponents beat your aces.
Let's assume that it will be head-up after this hand if you fold. You'll be about a 2-1 chip underdog with the leader (unless utg wins), taking 2d about 2/3's the time and coming from behind about 1/3 the time, for an ev of +$54 if you fold, call it $40-50 to take into account the chance of a split, etc.
It's nearly impossible, however, for you to lose aces to three players (assuming you don't fold). So playing the hand also guarantees you at least $18, bringing down your relative ev by folding to maybe $30. First place is $80. Therefore, the question is whether you'll win with AA against 4 players more than about 40% of the time. Even ignoring the chance of you losing the hand and taking second, you should have played the aces.
I agree with Chris on this one.
Maybe I am just stubborn. Aces even against 4 other players are still a slight favorite. I might only play AA or KK in this situation so are thinking is not really that far off.
So you fold and you are now down 4600-3400 which means you are only have about a 43% to win based on chip count.
If you call and lose you still have chips depending on which of the 3 or 4 all-ins win the hand. Sure in this example, it was a good fold but we all know we can't play results.
Glad you won,
Ken Poklitar
I think a call is automatic if you can carry your reasoning to the flop. You are last to act pre-flop, so you can't be raised, and if a 3rd Ace hits, you might win the tournament right there. That is enormous implied odds vs. 7.5 to 1 against. If not, and there is action, then get out if you like. You still would have T3000.
I've been watching the play at the baby limits on Paradise for hours at a time, taking notes on which players seem to know what they're doing and which ones are complete morons. Let me tell you, the morons are there in far greater numbers. They commit all of the deadly errors. Chasing with garbage, only to catch two mediocre pair on the river and beat someone else's pocket aces. Calling almost every hand, chasing to the river, then folding. Slowplaying two pair or trips. Calling down with 10 4 offsuit to make a king high hand. If there has been collusion at the $0.50/$1 tables, I haven't caught it yet. However, I did watch a $3/$6 game that was 8 or 9 handed break up in a flash after somebody lost a large pot. All of the sudden there were only 2 players left. At that point I wasn't taking notes, so who knows who they were. It kind of smacked of a hit and run to me. Certainly not the iron clad proof everybody would like to see, but if you're going to play online poker, you have to watch your own ass. Surely, Paradise needs to take the proper steps to prevent collusion, but it aint' all on their shoulders. I suggest you take notes when you play. Who you start out against and each new player who joins the game. Get a suspect list together and leave the game when they show up in it. Look for players who constantly show up in games together. Do you take more of your bad beats at the hands of these players? I think it's irresponsible to cry collusion only because you're losing. What's even worse is claiming that the only winners are the shills and colluders. Talk about sour grapes. If you suspect collusion, get the hand history and complain to Paradise. The players that I watched were losing because they lacked the discipline needed for the game of hold'em. Some of the bad players were winning. It happens. For my money, the bad players will never be punished severely enough. You've gotta be on you toes whether it's online poker or in a cardroom. I've been scouting out the game before I commit any money. In the end, if I lose, it's my own damn fault. Listening to people cry foul makes me sick. I doubt that everyone who's been whining about collusion is actually a victim of it. Deep inside, you know the real truth. You've been playing too many hands again, haven't you?
If someone wants to collude and they do it well, Paradise will never detect them. Sorry about you getting sick when someone tries to make people aware of collusion that is kicking their mediocre poker playing behind on a regular basis. These people actually think they know how to play poker! They can't understand why after playing their game and winning for a while, they can't win a hand. But you have it figured out. You've figured out a way to avoid the colluders and if you do unknowingly go up against them, your happy to accept your lickin because it's your own damn fault. You know that if you walk in the cow pasture, you will step in a cow pie once in a while. Some people don't wear a helmet when they ride a bike, some people smoke cigarettes even though they know it is bad for them. Some people play craps and some even play Keno! They probably know how to get around those pesky odds and actually win all the time. Hey, it's your neck. If you are going to play there, you'd better do what you suggest. Watch out for the cow pies. Good luck.
Anyone interested in the results can find them on: www.pokerpages.com/tournament/result1720.htm
You can also find great reviews of the final tables at www.poker.casino.com
0.50/ 1.- paradise
Table "Rotuma" (real money) -- Seat 8 is the button Seat 1: ($6 in chips) Seat 2: ($56 in chips) Seat 3: ($89.75 in chips) Seat 4: ($4 in chips) Seat 5: ($55 in chips) Seat 6: ($11.50 in chips) Seat 7: ($27 in chips) Seat 8: ($93.25 in chips) Seat 9: ($0 in chips) Seat 10: ME($111.75 in chips) Seat 10: ME : Post Small Blind ($0.25) Seat 1 : Post Big Blind ($0.50) Seat 5: Sit out Dealt to Seat 10: ME[ Js ] Dealt to Seat 10: ME[ Jh ] Seat 2 : Fold Seat 3 : Call ($0.50) Seat 4 : Call ($0.50) Seat 6: : Call ($0.50) Seat 7 : Check Seat 8: : Fold Seat 10: ME : Call ($0.25) Seat 1 : Check
JJ Preflop would be a good raise.
*** FLOP *** : [ 4h 9d 9h ]
Seat 10: ME : Bet ($0.50) Seat 1 : Raise ($1) Seat 3 : Fold Seat 4 Fold Seat 6: Call ($1) Seat 7: Call ($1) Seat 10: ME: Call ($0.50)
Seat 1 raised, 2 callers and me.
*** TURN *** : [ 4h 9d 9h ] [ 2d ]
Seat 10: ME : Check Seat 1 : Bet ($1) Seat 6: Raise ($2) Seat 7: Call ($2) Seat 10: ME : Fold Seat 1: Call ($1)
Two bets against me, was hoping for 1 bet and call and look the River if I can make a Full house. But 2 beats its a lot, i folded. You?
*** RIVER *** : [ 4h 9d 9h 2d ] [ Jc ] Seat 1 : Check Seat 6: Bet ($1) Seat 7: Call ($1) Seat 1 : Fold *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $14.50 | Rake: $0.50 Board: [ 4h 9d 9h 2d Jc ]
Seat 6 won with a full house 99922
Thanks
Mike
oups, sorry for the reading problems.
I think you played it right. I know it stinks when you see the river come like that after you're out of the hand, but it was a good fold. With that action, you are against trip nines minimum and you are basically drawing to one out. You were right to fold the turn. I would have checked to see the the flop too; no sense raising b/c if overcards come you will have to fold to any significant action.
Jeff
thanks for your comment.
any others?
Mike
I couldnt believe it when a knock at my door this morning was the fed-ex man with my cheque -from POKERSPOT!!Unbelieveable.I made my cashout of $1500 on Mar 17 and last Friday they said it was sent fed ex.They actually came through with their word.(I just hope it doesnt bounce).I have to admit that lately I think pokerspot are actually trying to clean up their act.Their software has always been among the best.With them actually paying out and improving customer service I think they may have a great shot at thriving.However time will tell and it will take a while for them to win peoples trust again.(at least mine anyway)I know for myself that I will never go buy in any huge amounts anymore on any new unproven site and I think I will give pokerspot another chance to win over my trust (i will not risk too much though)I would love to hear if anyone else gets paid or has a problem getting paid.
----------------------------------------------------- Game #73317392 - $3/$6 Hold'em - 2001/05/08-10:21:53 (CST) Table "Tutu" (real money) -- Seat 2 is the button Seat 1: Muflon ($172 in chips) Seat 2: kittie ($45.50 in chips) Seat 3: Texasboy ($241 in chips) Seat 4: LILY31 ($117.50 in chips) Seat 5: Boubaric ($131 in chips) Seat 6: TWEETY2 ($95 in chips) Seat 7: Chippy ($30 in chips) Seat 8: smalltalkdan ($71.75 in chips) Seat 9: ($200 in chips) Seat 10: frankieg ($75 in chips) Texasboy: Post Small Blind ($1) LILY31 : Post Big Blind ($3)
: Post ($3) Dealing... Dealt to [ 8c ] Dealt to [ 2h ] Boubaric: Fold TWEETY2 : Fold Chippy : Call ($3) smalltalkdan: Call ($3)
: Check frankieg: Fold Muflon : Fold kittie : Fold Texasboy: Call ($2) LILY31 : Raise ($3) Chippy : Raise ($6) smalltalkdan: Call ($6)
: Fold Texasboy: Fold LILY31 : Call ($3) *** FLOP *** : [ Tc Kh 7d ] LILY31 : Check Chippy : Bet ($3) smalltalkdan: Call ($3) LILY31 : Call ($3) *** TURN *** : [ Tc Kh 7d ] [ 5d ] LILY31 : Check Chippy : Bet ($6) smalltalkdan: Call ($6) LILY31 : Fold *** RIVER *** : [ Tc Kh 7d 5d ] [ Ks ] Chippy : Bet ($6) smalltalkdan: Call ($6) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $63 | Rake: $3 Board: [ Tc Kh 7d 5d Ks ] Muflon didn't bet (folded) kittie didn't bet (folded) Texasboy lost $3 (folded) LILY31 lost $12 (folded) Boubaric didn't bet (folded) TWEETY2 didn't bet (folded) Chippy bet $24, collected $63, net +$39 (showed hand) [ As Ac ] (two pair, aces and kings) smalltalkdan lost $24 [ 4c 7c ] (two pair, kings and sevens) lost $3 (folded) [ 8c 2h ] (a pair of kings) frankieg didn't bet (folded)
afterwards, i said, "lol. what mofo. r u guys cheating." then it was the usual silence and then huh... what percent do u guys believe of the 3/6 tables have partners (holdem)? what about 5/10? thanks
Hey B,
Not collusion here, just horrible playing by smalltalkdan. If Lily31 and Chippy were colluding, then Lily31 would have raised the turn, and Chippy would have re-raised. What a big mess for smalltalkdan then.
On the other hand, I do believe that collusion, especially in O and O8, are happening.
Mark
For all I know they might have been colluding. But you know what my first reaction was. I thought you were flipping out.
P.S. If I were you I'd never play on-line.
I don't know what would make you think they were cheating. All I see is some poor play by smalltalkdan. If he were colluding with chippy perhaps he would have raised the flop or the turn.
I think you're letting your imagination get the best of you.
you guys are probably right. i was just trippin off of reading too much 2+2=420 and rgp, or perhaps it was the blueberries. thanks for shaking me up.
what made you think there was any cheating here?????
Hello all, this hand happened to me playing last night. Playing 3-handed Hold 'em at $10/20 I'm dealt a pair 66 in the small blind. 3rd player limps in (the 3 of us were almost seeing every flop), I limp, big blind checks. Flop: 6-4-4. I rub my eyes in disbelief, as I had been taking some bad beats that day... I check, big blind bets, limper raises, i call, bb calls. Turn is a J, board now 6-4-4-J. I check, bb bets, limper raises, i re-raise, bb calls, limper caps, i call, bb calls. (wild huh?) River is a 10. board now 6-4-4-J-10 all offsuit. I bet, bb raises, limper re-raises, i cap, both call. The BB had J-6...ok... limper/raiser had 4-J (uh-oh), but I had a bigger boat, scoop the pot.
To anyone watching, that hand would look be screaming CHEAT all over it. I believe that this sort of hand just goes to prove that these online games can have some really really bad beats and be legit. I have no reason to suspect that there was any collusion there, since I won it, and if there was, it obviously backfired. I've taken some bad beats myself, especially yesterday, but I guess the randomized cards sorta evened out... I apologized for laying the bad beat on 4's full holder, and he left the game, as I would have too.
In hindsight, I should've said "oh shit" when the Jack hit, cuz at that point i was super-dead to JJ holder, and 10-10 at the river as well, all though there were no pre-flop raises, and usually these guys will raise any two high-cards, especially big pairs. in fact, my 6-6-6-4-4 was like 3rd possible nut, technically, but in actuality they were both drawing dead right from the start.
-jxp
what was the point of this babble, this is the sort of innane post that clutters this board and makes it virtually worthless!
I agree, this was pointless. You had the best hand and it won, This happens all the time in live games and online games. You made a big mistake by not raising preflop, but in the end it won you a lot of money.
thanks guys.
I would like to know how you laid a bad beat on a player who was better than you at no point in the hand.
I guess that proves it! There is no collusion. I can rest easy now. Everybody back into the pool! It was only a Baby Ruth!!!
Hi Edith I have spoken to Nishan at lenght on the phone. You are correct they are not pros, However you forgot to mention that 5 pro players work there ,why did you not mention this ????. Don Houser and frank castelic being 2 of them. David or Mason have already stated on here that they are connected in some way. Yes you are correct there is bad play there , This is not a reason to leave but to stay. I have 3 times what I started with because I am a good solid player with plenty of patience. It is also correct that you can speak to a host there and then if you suspect anything. Perhaps you would like people to keep playing paradise or are you just bitter at online poker because you have lost your cash. I believe true poker is the way forward online poker can and will be good for the poker community in general.
Pad
And a pro would be there why? If the play sucks, what is the point??????? Mason? Do you spend a lot of time there? If I told you I was a pro, would you beleive me????? If you beleive half of what you read, and half of what you hear, dig your own grave. Your opinion is your own. And I have NEVER played online poker. I make my living just fine the way it is. Believe and play what you will, FISH.
If I avg $20.00/hr at 10/20 holdem at a casino that deals about 30-35 hands/hr. Should I not be able to avg almost double at an online casino that deals 60-70 hands/hr? Also for my record keeping should I be booking double the amount of hrs when I play online to compensate for the amount of hands that are dealt online?
Thanks
I've played about 1000 hours in 20/40 and 40/80 in the real world and about 800 hours in the 20/40 on planet. my hourly rate on planet is about twice as high as it is in real life - so yes, I would say that if one plays just as well online vers the realworld, that one should be able to double their rate. of course, people don't keep records all that well in the real world, but it is kept perfectly for them online...get my drift?
I think you would be lucky to get 35 hands an hour at a casino, and definitely lucky to get 70 online. My experience online is 50-55. I think that's about 1.8 times the hands you get in live games, as my experience there tells me close to 30.
lars
One cannot fail to be amazed of how some people seem to be able to "forgive and forget" in the Pokerspot issue. I too have now received my check (or bank draft or whatever) covering my moderate initial buyin. Consider however these three statements from the staff at Pokerspot (these have been posted at this site earlier):
17th of march - Russ Boyd statement All cashouts requested after March 15* will now be processed as normal.
7th of April mail to Gene Also, recent cashouts are being processed as normal, and we are preparing to send out 20% of the old cashouts by April 15.
16th of april message of the day So far, they (the cashouts) are all on schedule, both the older ones and the most recent ones.
Now. According to the two first statements cashouts requested after March 15 were being prosessed "as normal". I made a cashout request shortly after the Russ Boyd statement. So far theres nothing. No e-mail - nothing. Thats seven weeks of nothing. Despite the statement April 16 (some four weeks after the RB stetement) that all cashouts were "on schedule".
I'm happy that I got some of my money back from Pokerspot. How anyone who have endured what we have can concider doing business with them again is anyones guess.
TT
I think that the reason that people are well disposed towards them despite the missed deadlines - I along with a number of other players I know are waiting for the credit card fraud investigation to be complete before we see any of our money - is that it would appear that they have been ripped off by a third party (NetPro) and that they are now trying their best to put things right.
I await my first payment still, but am hopeful of seeing it at some point in the future.
I received a dollar cheque yesterday,(I live in the U.K.), nothing else in the envelope, written on Bank of Nevis International Ltd.
Is this the bank that Pokerspot uses?
Mike.
Yes. That's from pokerspot.
Was your cashout requested before or after March 15?
TT
I requested it on the 18th February 2001. The cheque is dated 23rd April 2001. Thank you for reminding me - I kept a note in my office diary, and it is for the exact dollar amount I cashed out. I appreciate your response.
Good luck, Mike.
Planet made two updates today. The lobby and game list was updated to have a new look. Unfortunately the poker software is the same. I hope they get new software, I get dizy spells from the current one with the blue color. I hope planet gets new poker software soon. I am going to try ultimatebet.com they open for real money tommorow.
I don't know what it is about the software that they have that people don't like. I think its great, I like the blue, I like the characters......what do you all dislike about it? of course, if its the system breakdwons that happen way too often, sure, that's a legit concern.
Instead of blue they could have used a color that was easier on the eyes.
Like what?? Since when did blue become a garish colour that was hard to look at ?? Gee, no wonder nobody ever wears blue clothes huh ?!
I still don't know how anybody can prefer the Paradise table with those utterly impersonal ovals, to Planet's graphics which at least give you some way of recalling which opponent is which.
Blue clothes and a blue screen are quite different. When was the last time you had to stare at a blue shirt for ten hours. There are certain colors that work better with eachother when it comes to graphics, and planet obviously is not aware of this. How can you say that those stupid cartoon figures make it easier to identify players when there are only about five to (not)choose from.
I'd have thought any colour is hard to stare at for hours on end. It must be a purely personal thing whether you think blue is so much worse than bright green.
As for the graphics, you have to be kidding... If you want to be aware of which player is which, what is easier - an oval with a name in it, or a graphic ?? There is no comparison !!
let me see...which one is better?...a clearly displayed oval with a large font player handle...or a stupid looking cartoon(which you dont even get to choose) that is the same as about %20 of all other players at the site, with a tiny font,barely legibel player handle...you are right, there is no comparison... As for the color, i personally dont think the blue is bad...its everything else on the screen that hurts the eyes.
theres no color that is going to be pleasing to the eyes after 12 hours of looking at a bright screen. turn your brightness down this helps quite a bit if you know your going to play a long time.draw poker thats cool they have it they are the first to actually implement it .i switched from paradise to planet and like planet much better.better players at planet and the randomness of cards seems better at planet you dont see 4 four of a kinds at planet in a hour like you saw at paradise on a consistent basis,
I haven't played there in 6 months so I don't know if anything has changed.
I left there because I couldn't stand how the chips moved in. At Paradise it is very easy to see the bets and do calculations. I had trouble seeing whose bet belonged to who and what the totals were.
I would go back to Planet in a second if they upgraded their software.
Paradise is very ugly but it is functional.
that's odd, that doesn't seem even remotely close to an issue to me....i never had confusion about that at all.
This could be a workspace issue. I like a very large destop and so the Planet window is very small compared to the screen size of my monitor and I have the smae probelm as dk. If the table took up most of my screen I doubt it would happen. At Paradise I can see two tables without them overlapping very clearly.
I could change my screen size every time I want to play planet but I'm too lazy.
I have played both at planet and paradise. I find that paradise is a lot better. Planets software is terrible. Aside from all the crashed the table graphics are too cluttered and confusing...its very hard to see whats going on. I agree that paradise is functional, but why do you say that it is ugly?
What you have all ignored is the introduction of draw. 5 card draw is one of the oldest and greatest forms of poker. Finally there is a poker site that recognises pokers humble beginnings and is offering poker as we all started to play it.
Theres a reason no one plays it anymore. Not sure why they decided to bother with it. Time will tell.
.
There have been numerous articles in Card Player magazine over the years as to why Draw Poker is dieing in the cardrooms. (I'm sure Caro wrote at least one of them). Most if not all of them stated that it just can't compete anymore with the faster games of Hold'em and Omaha. People like action, especially the younger generation.
I was on the pokerspot 2/4 table today, and as soon as I sat down, players were chewing out a fish, for playing a por hand, and winning it. I told them it was one hand per player, and if they wanted to post money for the player they were giving a hard time, then they could criticise, otherwise, let the person who pays play there own hands.
Then comes two hands in a row that made "KindKieth" accuse me of cheating. I had pkt aces in SB, and he had pkt tens, we capped it out with two other players, flop is all hearts, I bet, "Kindkieth" raises, I call, turn is a Q, I bnet, "KK" raise, I call, river is 6, no more hearts flopping, I check, other player checks, "KK" bets, i call and win against his tens. The very next hand, Im in SB, and have pocket aces, "gforce" cals, "kindkeith" from mid postion raises, we cap it out again. flop is smal cards, two diamonds... and we cap it out, putting gforce all in. Turn is no help, I bet, "KK" raises, I call, river doesnt look to help, i check, "kindkieth" bets, I call. Gforce wins main pot with either a straight, or flush, dont remeber, and i take sidepot, against KindKeiths pkt tens again. Kind Keith then procefds to accuse me of cheating, having a program that tels me what the cards are, etc. I tel KindKeith, "Congratulations, I wil never play a money table with you again, no matter how horrible a player you are." I then wrote pokerspot sending them the conversation, etc. My reason for posting this is to wake players up. Why would you want to chase players from the table? As it is, KindKieth, if he is a good player..........use your own judgement on that, has cost himself a source of income. Buckcp
I think it is generally a good idea to take the side of the fish when he gets criticized. Make some remark to diffuse the situation. I usually say something about how poker is "gambling" and any two cards can win, etc. You don't want the fish to think, "hey maybe I am playing badly, what can i do to play better?" or to think, "this sucks I didn't play to have people yell at me, I'm leaving."
As far as being accussed of cheating the guy is an idiot. If you knew his cards you wouldn't be check-calling on the river or in a pot where you lose. If I were you I'd try to play agianst the guy as much as possible since he probably wont play his best against you. Plus, you can always turn the chat functions off.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
Buckcp was incredibly rude. When he arrived at the table, the first thing he said was, "I don't want to start a pissing contest, but...." As for me being an idiot, I'm not such a bad idiot that I would play bad cards, or against that lying hacker. And Paul, is it really necessary to call me an idiot? And where do you get the misguided idea that buckcp would fold out of the side pot just because he couldn't win the main pot? If I'm such an idiot, Paul, why don't you come to the table and put your money where your mouth is? Buckcp had as much manners as you, he called me stoippid. Incredibly, that was about par for his spelling. Undoubtedly when he ran his post through the spellchecker it couldn't even recognize many of the "words", I know it took some serious decyphering to understand his ranting and raving at the poker table.
Good to read your response, KindKeith.
I'm glad you responded here Keith. Yes, when I sat at the table, I said, "I don't want to start a pissing contest here but, it's one person per hand"..the person who was ragging on the player, who happened to suk out on a pot and win asked, "Whats that supposed to mean?" Where I said, "If you want to post someones money, then you can play their hand"... And you agreed with this statement. Then came the pkt aces, that you kept reraising against predflop, capping out the bet, with your pkt 10's. Now, I didnt say at anytime you were an idiot, after you accused me of cheating, and having a program, (tho I have to admit, you did it both time!!!! And I wonder what mentality player caps out betting preflop with pkt tens) I did say that I had written pokerspot with the hands in question, and hoped they would address this issue. My drawing attention to this is a sure sign of a person who hacks, or has a program. Beings you saw fit to respond, maybe you can answer the main point of this subject. Why would you intentionally acuse someone of cheating, or, badmouth someone who played their crads in what most would consider a poor way? If you remember, I never laughed, and said, "Sheesh, what a moron, capping out the beting preflop from early postion with a pair a 10's!" Nor did I ever once tell anyone how to play their cards, or make suggestions their play was stupid.
I did call you obtuse for accusing me of having a program that knew what cards were coming, or allowed me to give you pkt tens twice in a row, and me pkt aces. If I had such a program, I wouldnt be wasting my time at 2/4, and, I damn sure wouldnt just cal your bets on the river.
Now, to finish this pissin contest, all it did was cost you a source of income Keith. As I refuse to play with anyone who would rather talk smak, then play. Buckcp
He's not an idiot......he's Wyle E. Coyote, Poker Genious
When this sort of stuff happens at a live table i recommend a knife fight.
ROTFLMAO , well, I reckon it is pretty silly at that Mr. P.
Thanks for a good laugh
Buckcp
Can we place bets on who will win the fight? Of course house would take a 5% rake from the winner. :)
stocknaces dismissed my business plan outlined below with the following reason:
I remember the BARGE three years ago listening to David and Mason lecture at the horseshoe and one of the topics was collusion. They pointed out that it would be very difficult to pull it off successfully and in my opinion, I believe that also would true for games at Paradise Poker.
Would my plan really be that difficult? It seems simple (although requiring due diligence), effective and undetectable requiring no outrageous play. Simply playing good poker with a substantial statistical advantage should take home the money. If you are looking at 15 cards instead of 5 on the flop, I believe your advantage is huge.
The moderators of this forum are supposedly involved in collusion and cheating detection. Why haven’t they put in their two cents worth? Writing a book? I don’t expect a dissertation, but a simple examination and comment would be appreciated.
I’ve done some of the math, but would you statistical whizzes come up with a chart calculating the odds knowing 5 after the flop and then knowing 15? Then calculate the percentage of advantage over the myopic player when all else is equal. I’ve come up with a huge advantage in my calcs, but I’m not sure of my statistical math. Anybody able to come up with a clear report?
I restate a solution that I was proposing last year.
It concerns holdem.
Each player gets its hole cards from its own deck. The common cards come from another deck. For 10 players, 11 decks are necessary. No problem: the computer shuffles.
If one of your hole cards shows up on the board, you are counterfeited. If both your hole cards shows up, you play the board.
It is not difficult to understand that knowing the folded cards has no value here.
The only problem left is that you could be put in the middle by 2 partners. Even in that case you are in a better shape because you have more chance to share the top hand with one of the partner (for example, when KdJc3s flop, more than one player may flop a set of kings).
"Hey, I have 5 aces! All spades..."
Should be fun
Now this is a very different question from much of your thread below although you do mention it below. Doubtless a very significant advantage is thus obtainable and I'm sure David could put a number on it.
My disagreement with you is based on your assertion that since collusion is possible it is therefore widespread. Maybe it is, but you have not provided anything to support this conjecture, and I even showed you how your hypothetical "business plan" would have been quickly caught by Paradise Security.
Since when does some degree of feasibility equate to widespread activity?
You simply suggested that Paradise could catch you if you used the same computer after being banned. I proposed that you could simply throw away that cpu and purchase another for next to nothing. I also proposed that the id you are talking about from your computer is generated by code entered into your computers register by Paradise similar to what Napster does. People banned from Napster have been able to delete that code and go back with no problem from the same machine. Let me know if you want the details.
There would be no way for Paradise to detect a single person playing on two or more different computers with different phone lines and IP addresses. There would be no way to know it is the same person.
You never squashed my "business plan" proving that Paradise would catch on. You simply said that they have tricks up their sleeves that nobody knows about. What is that? You think they have computer skills that can pull a rabbit out of a hat? They can no more detect multiple computer play than the man in the moon.
I could play two Paradise accounts right now with the two machines on my desk. I could be at the same table in less than 1 minute and nobody would know. If I had my buddy at his desk with his 2 computers, we then have 4 players at the table. We'd be able to look at 11 cards to your 5. You don't think so? Show me that I cannot. I don't think you can.
Please excuse any spelling errors as that may require you to discredit the entire idea.
Again, it is not that what you suggest cannot be done because of course it can be done and almost certainly is being done to some extent. It is an unfounded leap, though, to jump from that fact to the assertion that therefore it must be occurring on a widespread basis.
The real questions are how widespread is it, how skilled are the colluders, how many of them does Paradise catch (and not just "bar" but perhaps seize some accounts? if they do this it would be a strong deterrent to a second attempt) and most importantly how much harm does the current level of collusion cost a player who is theoretically expected to win.
I don't think anyone, including me, is attempting to say that collusion does not exist or is impossible or would not be theoretically profitable for skilled persons, but you seem keep dwelling on this aspect.
Now that we've established that it can be done and very easily, the question really is, do you trust the good side of human nature not to cheat?
1519 players are playing at 183 tables!
Out of 1519 players, how many are colluding? Just hazard a guess. Now check out the odds difference between seeing many more cards than your opponent.
The earn does not have to be a landslide, just steady. For the level headed colluders, it is open season. I bet they are there and there are more of them than you expect.
My point is that you are playing a game that you can win if it is a level playing field and you cannot if it is not. I feel sorry for the poker player that finds online poker his only option for playing. He has a tough row to hoe.
I'm sure Paradise wants to stop the colluders, but they are powerless except for the most inept. Play at your own risk.
I completely agree it is caveat emptor and I always advocated such a policy and employed it myself.
It is not only how many of those playing do you trust that matters, though. It is a further parlay because of whatever percent you distrust, how many of those are skilled players, how many are skilled colluders, how many escape detection by Paradise and/or continue playing somehow, and how much does the level of collusion hurt the expected earn of a skilled player.
As I said before, during my experience it did not seem overly significant, although towards the end I grew a bit more suspicious of some odd plays and this was only one amongst many factors which led me to take a hiatus from online play.
There is nothing wrong with a caveat emptor approach to online poker. I just think your argument at present has a long ways to go before it can show the existence of widespread and seriously harmful collusion rather than the potential for it, or even show a high likelihood of such. However, I do feel the potential for it means that the highest of precautions and the best possible methodologies should continually be employed and updated by online poker sites to avert what could eventually become a widespread problem (if it is not already--as stated, I haven't been playing lately so I have no sense of current playing conditions). My whole quibble with you over this hinges on the leap from the potential to the assumption that the worst is already occurring on a widespread basis.
Ok, here's what I came up with. This model is 6 players at one table acting as a team. I'm not too versed at HTML, but I think you get the picture.
cards seen 5 15
not seen 47 37
Outs Chances:1
2 22.50 17.50
3 14.67 11.33
4 10.75 8.25
5 8.40 6.40
6 6.83 5.17
7 5.71 4.29
8 4.88 3.63
9 4.22 3.11
10 3.70 2.70
11 3.27 2.36
12 2.92 2.08
13 2.62 1.85
14 2.36 1.64
15 2.13 1.47
How's my math?
Las Vegas would probably set up a game if they had this statistical advantage over their players. Think of their overhead. You can do it in the comfort of your own home at a fraction of the price. Why does anyone need some idiot admitting to it to believe it? That is the only way that it can be proven. You won't see it in hand histories. You wouldn't have to see the same players at the table all the time.
The juice is too attractive. Think about the slams you've experienced over and over and over again. Yes, this is a theory and yes it is speculation. However, it does, in theory, explain it all. Nobody has come up with a better explanation that I've heard and nobody, least of all Paradise Security, has sucessfully refuted it as balderdash.
Oh boy. The advantages of knowing 15 cards instead of 5. I'm sold and so I just quit my day job. But as the say, the devil is in the details, so roll up ourselves and begin.
Challenge number 1:
Can we serious propose 6 very good players acting together as a team? Ok, how about 5, or 4 or even 3? How are we going to all play at the same table without raising suspicion?
What happens when our particular table goes down? Does every account then follow the leader over to a new table like a collection of baby ducks following their mother? Can we believe that Paradise isn't going to notice this type of activity?
I can easily envision algorithms that can detect and raise red flags if even three players seem to be following each other around and playing too much at the same tables. The only way that we can elude the detection algorithms is to have these players play at separate tables for significant amount of time. But that defeats benefits of collusion, doesn't it?
Are we really saying that optimally these accounts can only play at the same tables or not at all? After all, we can't be playing at other tables without our colluding cohorts giving us our fair advantage or we will be eaten alive by all of the other colluders swimming around and we will lose all of our chips and we might as well give up the game and play TTH. So now we must recalculated our profits base on all of the money that we will lose when our accounts are playing at different tables losing all of their chips to all of the other colluders while we try to fool Paradise's software.
Shees! I don't know anymore. We're down to only 3 people now, or accounts, which can afford to play at the same table together, but not for long too long because we have to fool the software. We only know 4 more cards now than we should, only enough to give us a modest advantage, not a tremendous one, but then we have to give so much of it back to all those other colluders while we play at separate tables trying to fool the detection software.
I still strongly maintain that knowledge of 4, or ever 6 more cards will not turn a mediocre player into a winning one. There is so, SO much more to winning poker than simply knowing how to calculate odds on a flush draw.
Challenge number 2:
We need to find true winning players to team up with and not chumps. Where are we going to find 5 or even 2 other winning players willing to collude with and play the same games we do? Our new and improved odds do not much help a player who is oblivious to pot odds and doesn't know whether to raise or fold while holding KK and looking at a flop of A,10,9 and staring across the table at an aggressive player. I would dare say that even the vast majority of the so-called pro's I play against are not winning players; only in their own minds. We simply cannot depend on most of these professionals to provide themselves a good income and last for very long in this game. Where do you think many of the dealers and cab drivers in Las Vegas came from? Finding true winners to collude with won't be easy.
Challenge number 3:
Where are we going to find trustworthy partners that we can really count on? You know, people of good character, judgment and temperament? People who will keep their word? I know, the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
Wanted: Wining poker players looking to make 100 thousand and up! Must have a proven track record of winning over several years, have a bankroll of at least 5K, must be willing to engage in unethical and possibly illegal activity. Must be trustworthy, have outstanding character and emotional stability. Please include references.
Challenge number 4:
Do we really know all of the methods that Paradise can use to detect who we really are? Cookies, registry entries, hard drive writes, IP addresses, MAC addresses, phone numbers etc. One misstep here and the gig is all over.
I can go on, but I think this is enough for now. Let's just say that if you want these people to play together successfully as a team, and not just flash their down cards, then the challenges to make this work go up exponentially which means that your chances of success go down the same.
Do we really know all of the methods that Paradise can use to detect who we really are? Cookies, registry entries, hard drive writes, IP addresses, MAC addresses, phone numbers etc
Yes.
Cookies - They don't use them. Cookies are part of the HTTP protocol which Paradise is not using. They do not use the WWW port 80 socket, they are using their own.
Registry entries - Do a search or compare. Very easy.
Hard Drive Writes - Sure they can store information and it is easy to detect if they do.
IP Addresses - Most people are using DHCP. This means their IP address is dynamically assigned by their ISP each time they connect.
MAC Addresses - MAC implies a network interface card. This is not only not a requirement for internet connection, it is usually not present in home machines.
This forum is very funny. The mix of Poker and computers is strange. Many of you are poker savvy and computer morons. Stick to what you know.
By the way, if you want to collude you do not need partners. It is very easy to have multiple connections from one location. I suspect that the only issue is setting up accounts under different names. All you need is a few friends or relatives. There is no way Paradise would be able to determine the origin of the traffic.
Maurice,
I believe you would soon be easily caught, if you tried your one-man band technique.
It is very easy to underestimate how hard it is to get away with collusion, just as it is easy to underestimate how difficult it can be to detect. With a few exceptions, these posts on collusion do not show much of an appreciation for the complexity of this issue.
William
Well said, William. I'm still struggling to make the same point with such good brevity.
Maurice, that was a rhetorical question only, pointing out that the average user is unaware of the many conceivable methods by which they can possibly give away who they really are, or at least what computer they are using. And btw, a MAC address is not used exclusively in Ethernet cards.
As far as the viability and effectiveness of Planet Poker actually using one or more of these methods, it's not my intention or desire to explore that subject. I would invite that to be a discussion under an entirely different heading.
"This forum is very funny. The mix of Poker and computers is strange. Many of you are poker savvy and computer morons. Stick to what you know."
Well, let's see. I know that you took a rhetorical question and nit-picked it into something that it was never meant to be and that sophomoric name calling probably really wasn't what you intended. Or maybe it was. Who cares?
I also know that my attempt at humor in my previous post probably fell a little flat. But folks, just because significant collusion is conceivable doesn't mean it's viable. Just because it can potentially be profitable doesn't mean that it is. Successfully setting up several accounts is only the beginning. It only puts the ball on the 10 yard line and there are still 90 yards to go.
Playing at the same tables is a big problem. How do you avoid Paradise Poker's detection software when you don't even know what the algorithms are? How much is detection avoidance strategy going to cost you (or your partners) in expected value and time?
How do you find the right people to collude with and how do you trust them? Are they really that smart and skilled to pull it off? Wow! That's a tremendous hurdle right there.
How does knowing a couple more down cards transform a poor player into a successful one? (Hint, it doesn't.)
What is a successful playing strategy for collusion? What increase in expected value can be gained by employing it? To what degree do we have to disguise our play in order to avoid the detection software? How much will this cost us in expected value?
If you're already a winning player, which you have to be in order to successfully pull this off, is it worth the risk of getting caught?
Paradise is very good place to play for many of us and we don't cheat. If we're going to question the reputation and competence of this business, all I ask is that we please do it with facts and details, something that moves the ball the other 90 yards against a Baltimore Ravens defense. I don't think we can.
Stocksnaces - I did not intend to offend. As a matter of fact I was not commenting on whether or not collusion exists online or how difficult it would be to pull off.
I was only commenting on the ability of a site to determine whether multiple players were originating from the same physical location. I assure you that I would be able to determine if they could determine that.
And btw, a MAC address is not used exclusively in Ethernet cards
Reread my post, the word Ethernet does not appear anywhere. MAC is a replacement for part of the area between levels one and three in the OSI protocol model. It came about when LANs became popular. Although dialup networking does bind to NDIS and therefore plays in the MAC game, there is no MAC address if there is no network interface card (Ethernet, Token Ring, FDDI, etc...). The point is that a MAC address is unique but no such identifier can be assumed.
That's all I'm going to say about that. I'm sure I've bored 99% of all the readers.
A few days ago I had an interesting thought (at least to me) about collusion and Hold'em. I normally play stud so Hold'em is still somewhat new to me. I am well aware that hands like A5 are not very good because they easily can be dominated by any hand holding an ace with a higher second card. However, if I were playing two hands and held an ace in each I would be very likely to play both of them. If an ace hits the board it would be very likely that no other player held one. One of the two hands would be very strong with the ace pair. Of course the higher kicker has the advantage but the lower one could hit 2 pair. Two random knowedgeable players would dump A5 and A8, but if they were a team they both may want to play.
To me, the collusion issue is fascinating. It creates some interesting conditions to think about.
Whether or not it is a big issue online is anyone's guess. I can say I haven't noticed anything suspicious playing stud.
I agree with you that the collusion issue is interesting. I wish there was more quality information about it in the poker literature, but then, maybe it's just not an important enough issue for the experts to bother with.
I'm alarmed that a site that has done everything so well can have its reputation tarnished so quickly, and in my opinion, unfairly. Please don't think I'm pointing the finger at you when I say that, simply, this whole collusion rumor mess is out of control in my humble opinion.
I misplayed a hand at Paradise one afternoon, finding myself on the flop with a pair of tens and a crappy kicker, late position. Bet, call, I raise, call, call. Turn is an overcard: check, check, I bet, raise, call, I fold. After the hand, my opponents were demanding to know how I could raise on the flop, come out betting on the turn, only to so quickly fold. I had to explain to them that nothing funny was going on, simply by that point in the hand I could clearly see that my cards were no good, that's all. I'll bet you someone still sent in the hand history to Paradise to accused me and someone else of collusion.
I guess one good thing about these discussions is that it may motivate the online sites to better address the issue. After all, if a significant percentage of its customer base is concerned, fairly or unfairly, it probably behooves them to be more proactive in dealing with it.
Your challenges are good. They are hurdles, but not high hurdles. I’ve run my own business for nearly 20 years. I quickly became expert in many things that presented themselves as hurdles. The problems you presented do not require the stars and the moon to align to overcome. They are minor. I’ve already detailed a simple multiple player system while mixing up accounts so that the players don’t do the duck walk.
The box that sits under your desk may work like magic, but it’s not. The computer operating system is a closed system. There is only so much anyone can do and it is not that difficult to know what that is. As Maurice points out, a competent tech can and will confirm that anonymity is guaranteed if you do it correctly. My 16-year-old son can do that. So yes you can really know what tricks Paradise has up their sleeves. They don’t have any for this.
The point is, and I still think it’s valid, that collusion is eminently possible. Most likely it is happening. There is a good chance that it is happening quite a bit. From the math calculations that I have put forth, that no one has disputed, the advantage is huge.
We need to stop arguing about whether or not it can happen. It can. We need to stop grasping at some ethereal straw about why poker is different on Paradise. The players are too good, the players are too bad, the games are fixed, Paradise deals better cards to bad players, on and on. The fact of the matter is, collusion has been pooh-poohed by a rather vocal majority of so called winners, that dismiss claims by self proclaimed decent players that cannot win a reasonable number of sessions playing good tight poker. The truth is that collusion could explain most of the bad beats and outrageous results that people complain about. It should not be ridiculed as voodoo science because no-one can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. If done properly, you would never detect it. That is the inherent weakness in the whole online poker system. It would be nice to eliminate it, but I don’t think you can. Lets bring it out into the open and stop sweeping it under the rug.
Is anyone surprised or upset that our moderators have not been willing to enter into the fray here and add their two cents?
Chip Breaker,
Since you don't play internet poker because of so called collusion, and since you post on an internet poker forum, you must have some kind of agenda. (ie. you work for a brick and mortar).
Now please don't tell us you post here to save us from the evils of internet poker. If that's the case, please preach somewhere else. No, no one died and made me king. But this is an internet poker forum for internet poker players, trying to improve their play.
Example1: You hate Chinese Cooking or have been poisoned by a Chinese Chef. Do you post on a Chinese Cooking forum and say all Chinese food is bad? Don't eat it!
Example2: Gambling forum. A member from Gamblers Anonymous starts posting the evils of gambling. Guess what? They don't belong on that forum.
I'm open to hearing anybody else's thought on forum postings, and why the anti-topic people should be allowed to post.
Sorry, I didn't know the forum topic was for people who only had positive things to say about internet poker. Maybe Mr Malmuth should start a topic "Anti Internet Poker".
The subject is not anti topic, it's anti collusion. I've stated several times that the idea of playing online poker is very attractive. I've logged 100's of hours on Paradise and other sites and I don't play anymore because it has turned into a game where the odds are worse than Three Card Monty.
You are obviously a colluder or a shill for online poker and having failed to discredit my theory, you resort to villifying the poster.
Sorry to inform you that I'm not a colluder or a shill for online poker. Just tired of somebody repeating themselves over and over and then concluding that nobody should play online poker.
Of course there is collusion happening in online poker. So lets figure out a way to reduce it. There are many intelligent posters here, including yourself, who could come up with some positive ideas.
There is collusion in real cardrooms too, where nothing to my knowledge is done to the colluders. Las Vegas cardrooms still make their rake even if cheating is going on! Does that mean we stop playing in real cardrooms too?
Lets get real.
The point that you seem to forget, Max, with all due respect, is the fact that in a casino, when there is collusion, you have to face your opposition.
Get caught and you could seriously wind up hurt. Also, you can immediately ask to see a hand of anyone you think is playing suspiciously. After a time of this, colluders will be much more reticent to engage in the activity.
I'm not taking anything away from your point, because collusion does take place in casino's, although I believe the instances are much more rare. I know of a set of twins in AC that I distinctly overheard say to another friend "we gonna chop up the 30-60 today?"
The obvious answer to Chip Breaker is to ignore him, although I for one, happen to enjoy his posts...
Respectfully, Mike
PP 20 dollar tourney. It's now down to 5 players. The limits are 400-800. I am second to act and I have about 1350 in T-chips. UTG raises to 800 (he played very tight when it was full handed, it's no longer full handed but he has not tried to steal blinds yet). He has, before the raise, about 1800 in T-chips. I have Kd 10d. One player has about 2100 in chips and the other two have about 1.5k each. What would you do ???
Fold. KTs is not a great heads up hand and a raise UTG indicates he probably has a real hand himself.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
I would fold.
At this point I want to be the initial raiser with this type of hand.
Ken Poklitar
super easy fold
Unfortunately, this table is not set up well as everyone still has game. At some point soon you will have to take your shot. However, this is not the time.
How did you play this hand and how did you finish?
Your about to put up half your chips in blinds - have a gamble with a half decent hand.
Without looking at other responses, and having been in this situation before, I believe my answer would be f-o-l-d.
Fold 100 times out of 100!
Wait for a better hand.
but fold fold fold...muck them rags fast...gl
In 3 hands time the poster could have blinded away nearly half his stack and be left without enough to put in a full raise.
I really don't think that you can be sure the UTG has a big hand - he is about to post the hefty blinds. There are only a few hands he could have that put the poster in serious difficulty.
This particular tourney has turned into a crap shoot and KTs is good enough to gamble with.
The only time I might agree with you is if the blinds are doubling on the very next hand. Watching when the blinds are going up are very important in these tournies.
If the blinds are not going up for a bit I would raise with anything decent on the next hand. If the blinds are going to be go up when I hit the blinds then I might raise with anything next hand.
Ken Poklitar
although the cards hardly matter, whats more important is what your situation with paradise is and how the money would best be ditributed among the remaining players....i.e. where is the least amount of financial risk with a win taking place...to think that you have any individual control over the outcome is laughable at best... however re-raise the steal attempt..get the hand heads up and pray
Check this baby out , and then imagine if I had taken the flop with my Kxs and flopped a flush.
Table "Bonaire" (real money) -- Seat 8 is the buttonSeat 1: Monkeyman ($3,062 in chips) Seat 2: John D ($896 in chips)
Seat 3: GRETZKY ($507 in chips) Seat 4: AAraise ($500 in chips)
Seat 5: Jimmy K ($424 in chips) Seat 6: toptrade21 ($509.50 in chips)
Seat 7: The Dane ($526 in chips) Seat 8:
($468 in chips) Seat 9: cplayer ($598 in chips) Seat 10: moneybags1 ($742.50 in chips)
cplayer : Post Small Blind ($10)moneybags1: Post Big Blind ($15)Dealing...
Dealt to John D [ Kc ]Dealt to John D [ 4c ]Monkeyman: Fold John D : Fold
GRETZKY : Fold AAraise : Raise ($30)Jimmy K : Fold toptrade21: Call ($30)
The Dane: Fold
: Call ($30)cplayer : Call ($20)moneybags1: Raise ($30) AAraise : Raise ($30)toptrade21: Call ($30)
: Call ($30) cplayer : Call ($30)moneybags1: Call ($15) *FLOP*** : [ 6c 9c 5c ]
cplayer : Check moneybags1: Bet ($15)AAraise : Call ($15)toptrade21: Raise ($30)
: Call ($30)cplayer : Call ($30)moneybags1: Raise ($30)AAraise : Fold toptrade21: Raise ($30)
: Call ($30)cplayer : Call ($30) moneybags1: Call ($15) *** TURN *** : [ 6c 9c 5c ] [ 5h ] cplayer : Check moneybags1: Check toptrade21: Bet ($30) : Call ($30)cplayer : Call ($30) moneybags1: Call ($30) *** RIVER *** : [ 6c 9c 5c 5h ] [ Ad ] cplayer : Bet ($30) moneybags1: Raise ($60)toptrade21: Call ($60) : Fold cplayer : Raise ($60)moneybags1: Raise ($60)toptrade21: Call ($60) cplayer : Call ($30) *** SUMMARY ***Pot: $1,032 | Rake: $3
Board: [ 6c 9c 5c 5h Ad ]Monkeyman didn't bet (folded)
John D didn't bet (folded) [ Kc 4c ] (a flush, king high)
GRETZKY didn't bet (folded) AAraise lost $75 (folded)
Jimmy K didn't bet (folded)
toptrade21 lost $270 [ 6s 6d ] (a full house, sixes full of fives)
The Dane didn't bet (folded)
lost $150 (folded) cplayer bet $270, collected $1,032, net +$762 (showed hand) [ 8c 7c ] (a straight flush, five to nine)
moneybags1 lost $270 (showed hand) [ Ah As ] (a full house, aces full of fives)
wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -----------------
If you all want to play at somewhere nice and peaceful with the best Support Staff ever online ..there is no doubt about it, it should be HighlandsClub. I've played there a few time but notice that there are not much games going currently so would like to incourage you to come play also. I really would like to see them make it as their are one of the Best online Poker Room.
Hope to see you soon!!!
It is our policy not to allow any site to post advertisements. (They are welcome to purchase them.) If you are a player who is independent of the site and you wish to state a very positive opinion that's fine, but you need to state that you have no relationship wityh the site (except as a player). Your email addess seems to imply that this is not the case. If that's true, please don't make this type of post anymore.
I too play highlands and also think it is one of the best online poker sites around.No one comes close to the superior customer service that Highlandsclub provides.Payouts are made within 2 days to your door by fed-ex(also fastest online).As well they are the only online site so far to provide a badbeat jackpot -as well also a free monthly tounrey worth over $5000.They have a customer service phone number you can call anytime and a host button in which you can call the house to the table anytime.The only negative towards highlandsclub is their software -its the same as planets and is outdated and slow.I would also like to mention that the new site True poker also has the toll free phone# and the room host button.They have pretty cool software -virtual reality style ,however is still alot slower than paradise
I've had an unusually poor experience with the jokers that run Highlands. I'd suggest a prudent fellow simple avoid these amatures. Better yet, avoid internet poker all together.
Hi!!!
Just wondered if any of the many experts on this forum could explain a little about what swings to expect while playing two tables at Paradise at once. Also, please debate some pros and cons? I am very curious of this matter.
All the best!
Stan
IMO not a good idea.
Pros:
1. Win more money faster.
Cons:
1. Lose money faster (swings greater)
2. Loss of concentration
3. Time outs
4. Tilt factor twice as likely, (better really keep an open mind on this one!)
Probably many more.
Not a good idea IMO
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
The swings are not greater playing two tables at once. They're of the same magnitude, but occur twice as fast.
Chris
I think it really depends on the player and, most importantly, the limit at which you play.
I do play 2 tables at once, all the time. I play limits from 2-4 to 5-10 depending on the game. I make 1.5 BB/H playing like this (so 3BB/H at 2 tables). So, for me, it sure is a great option. I just play very solid poker. Sure I lose on bluffs and semi-bluffs at times but the games are easy to beat by just playing solid. And I don't think the little bets I miss at times would give me another 1.5 BB/H.
That said, when I venture into 10-20 land (or sometimes the 5-10 games), I never play 2 tables at once. The concentration level needed to succeed is higher. Also, I never play a tournament and another cash table, tournaments need more attention than the lower limits. At the lower limits, play is more mechanical thus playing at 2 tables at once isn't too bad for your play, IMO.
I also find that concentrating hard on tiny screen is hard to do for me, so I prefer just playing solid, and I can do that at 2 tables at once. Timing out is a very rare occurence as I rarely am involved in 2 pots at the same time.
Nicolas Fradet (ThePrince)
I always play two tables. However, it gets me in trouble if I am not at my best.
The biggest problem for me is that I can't get the reads on the players I want (need). On one table it is simple - on two tables it is very difficult.
I disagree about playing a tournament table as one of your two tables. This simply could be because of my playing style which is extremely tight early on in the tourney.
Over two tables I am about 1.5BB an hour + tourney winnings which I haven't tracked well.
Personally speaking, my win rate was far lower when playing two tables at once. It's not nearly as easy as it would seem and the chance of error is greater. Maybe some others can do it almost as well as playing just one table, but I couldn't, apparently. Approach with caution, that's my best advice re. playing more than one table, and if your results suffer tr you find yourself making more errors, stop.
I'm not an expert but I definitely make more money on two tables than one. But it took me a while diminish what was at first an intolerably high error rate, such as too quickly folding or calling with marginal draws and pairs. This is a little hard to admit, but twice I've missed straight flush hits on the river.
One thing I would suggest is that, at least at first, to play too tables with similar lineups. I often play $5-10 with $3-6, and I have to remember that the players tend to be different even at these levels. If I'm tired or not concentrating, I've noticed a tendency to pay off a bit too much in the former and fold too much in the latter.
Overall, your win rate graph line will be smoother because you're cramming so much experience into such a short period of time. In a given day or week, however, you should expect much worse swings than you've seen on one table, and almost unbelievable swings compared to a casino, like losing the better part of a grand in 10 hours of $5-10 or even $3-6.
If you have a tilt problem don't even consider it.
Glad to know someone else had a high error rate early on with two tables, and glad to hear you overcame it. I never did quite get over making too many errors when playing two tables at once.
It's very tricky. It really is. If you're very good, then you can pull it off but don't expect to double your win rate because mistakes will be made.
It's positive in the sense that it cuts down on the boredom.
I didn't see this in any of the responses - if you play two tables you better have a BIG monitor. I've played two tables at 1280x1024 and that's really just barely big enough. You want a minimum overlap of the screens for the games you are playing. NEVER play with one directly on top of the other. The software is kind of silly and action that you make on the top window might also occur on the hidden window.
dak
I was playing omaha hi/low on Paradise yesterday and I thought you would love to hear about 2 hands one player was fortunate to get. These are back to back hands.
Hand 1. Hero QhQsAc4c. vs Loser KdKh6d9h.
Flop is TsThKc. Loser flops a full house.
Turn is Qc. River is Qd. Runner/runner quads. Loser was not amused.
Hand 2. Hero AdTdKc5h
Flop is Kd3s5s. Hero flops 2 pair.
Turn is Jd. River is Qd. Runner/runner royal flush.
One has to love runner/runner! The hero in questioned actually talked so it appeared he was not a bot :)
Ken Poklitar
Once saw a r-r quads in holdem against a top set.
"Dealer, I'd like two 7's please." I want to be able to place thoose orders to. I don't even think 77 was above the middle card on the flop.
Sincerly, Andreas
I was playing 5/10 HE simultaneously with a $30 tournament sitting in seat 7 at both tables. I was dealt KK at both tables at the same time. The very next hand I was again dealt KK at both tables. What is the probability of that ? (Incidently, all four hands won. KK not cracked. What is the probability of that.) LOL
I don't play online other than pokerpages tourneys.
Quick rundown of cheating online.
You and 5 friends sign up for any online poker place. Log into the same room and destroy 2 or 3 unsuspecting players. No measures they could take would be able to stop this.
Just play live or for fun online.
that is all, danny boy :o)
Oh my gosh... WE'RE ALL DOOMED!
Impossible to stop in real cardrooms. (Never heard of anyone being caught or charged). So just play for fun there too.
Righto Travis... you have it all sorted out eh? Of course you won't acutally do it because you don't have 5 friends. Let me guess you had aces cracked, so you think you must be up again a tream of colluders. Hell, I know people who play on line, and if I wanted to ring them all up at once and do some sort of colluding I could. There are reasons why I think people don't collude;
1) Why bother? It's would be too much hassle I reckon to orchestrate a team of players to share hands and get a plan ready in the middle of the hand. I think other players would get too suspicious if the same guys were timing out every hand, while the team got their little collusion plan ready.
2) I reckon its easier to play good winning poker than to collude effectively. You and a mate team up against a decent hand,you are both going to lose your checks.
3) Common decency. Although not %100, I would assume there are people who simply don't like cheating. I mean, would you steal something from some one if you knew you could not get caught? Some would not. I would not.
4) You can get caught. I have no idea what they do, but I assume Paradise would be able to tell if some one was consistently 3 betting flops turns and rivers then folding to a cap or some random betting like that. Recall they know what we have even if we don't show down.
I reckon if you, stocknaces, Max and M ridicule and deride the posters (especially the new ones) that have an opinion about collusion, consistently and long enough, they may leave and let you have this forum to advertise the wholesome goodness of online poker. Your tag team blustering and chest pounding is not conducive to intelligent counterpoint. You are effectively discouraging open discussion and participation. You, or the 4 or 5 anonymous names that you post under are a prime example of working together to achieve a goal. Way to go guys.
I don't deride or ridicule those who share your views. I try to look at things as logically as possible; that's all. It's not a bad approach.
Same here.
Chip, let me apologize in advance for being paranoid, but the original post here sounds surprisingly a lot like you. Just grab a few of the neighborhood kids, beanie caps and all, a bunch of cheap computers, a few Paradise accounts and then go roll all the chumps on Paradise Poker who have been playing the game for a million years.
We just keep hearing the same theory, like it's a political slogan, or a Pepsi commercial or something. Or as my wife sometimes says to me, quit beating a dead horse to death. -:)
Btw: I’m not a shill for Paradise. This is just my humble opinion, acting on it alone. That’s all.
stocknaces, I assure you it wasn't me mascarading as someone else. I've stated my thoughts pretty openly and am not stuffing the ballot box. You agree that collusion is possible, but then try to discredit or belittle anyone who brings it up. I am not a beating dead horse here. It is real and will be ongoing. You will see more and more people coming up with the same basic conclusion......online poker is a flawed system, moreso than brick and mortar card rooms. The door is open for collusion and I think there are those that walk through that door.
Read poster after poster astounded at the turn around and dive to the negative side of their standard deviation. This can be explained by the type of hit and run collusion I've outlined. It may be wrong, sure, but it is a reasonable explanation whether you agree or not. You play long enough and you will most likely encounter it.
Why do you think Mr Sklansky and Mr Malmuth are so silent on this subject? Collusion is a no brainer for even the most basic criminal mind. Look up the two 16 year old Russian hackers that were caught only by a sting operation. They were undetectable while hacking into some of the most secure sites on the web. You don't think that can happen here? My bet is that there is a storm brewing and the proverbial sh** is going to hit the fan.
Why do you think Mr Sklansky and Mr Malmuth are so silent on this subject?
Beats me. It's probably a sensitive subject for them and they may wish to avoid even the possible appearance of conflict of interest. That would be my best guess.
btw: I don't wish to belittle anyone. I just try and have a little fun with these posts, mine included.
A quote from Mr. Sklansky when I asked him about online poker collusion some 10 months ago:
"In general, I think it's okay. You just have to watch out for certain things."
Draw your own conclusions.
-á
Hi
I got a mail from Paradise poker answering some of my concerns regarding online collusion.
They flag all BIG hand folding preflop : Like you hold AQ and your partner has AK. If you fold that AQ they will now.
If trash hands goes to a raising war.. Pop, there goes another flag up.
They also offcouse check the IP adresses. If your team seems to be in the same building. POP again.
Also they will be able to look into the facts mailed to them by angry players that feel they have been cheated. If they find anything, you are gone.
Btw, I never heard of of any cheaters beeing caught by Paradise, and they definately must have caught a few. My theory is that since they offcourse can not go out in public and say we caught him or her cheating maybe they flag the cheaters and make sure they constantly feed the game with fresh cash, by supplying them with the wrong cards at the right time? Maybe some of the colluders wonder why they don't win online? Well, maybe someone knows.
"""""Btw, I never heard of of any cheaters beeing caught by Paradise, and they definately must have caught a few. My theory is that since they offcourse can not go out in public and say we caught him or her cheating maybe they flag the cheaters and make sure they constantly feed the game with fresh cash, by supplying them with the wrong cards at the right time? Maybe some of the colluders wonder why they don't win online? Well, maybe someone knows."""""
I will fold AQ offsuit and other big hands before the flop if I think they will be dominated and I would absolutely never collude. Paradise should absolutely not be doing *anything* to change the random distribution of the cards under any circumstances. I'm not saying that they are, but there never could be any justification for doing so. I hope that your speculation is wrong.
Agreed.
To make someone lose they would have to make someone else win.
But ...
Can one volunteer for this role if it has to be done to ward off the cheaters?
I considered playing online. But when I looked at the structure, anyone can play in any room they want at paradise. I don't collude and am an honest poker player. I love the game. I have never had aces cracked online at any real money site, because I don't play for real money online. I know it is tempting for people who don't have cardrooms nearby, but be careful. If anything, play that little 50 cent game. Definately no collusion going on. It's just not worth it. Just my opinion, flame me all you want.
that is all, danny boy :o)
I've never heard anyone shout out starting hands to their partners at my card room? I guess collusion online and in live rooms is the same in your book? What book are you reading?
It is so easy to spot collusion at a live room. If I see it, the heat is on immediately, I don't stand for it. The flock quickly scatters. I could leave the room, but I choose to stand up for the game. I play in the casinos, so it's not hard to voice your opinion. I don't worry about the colluders because security is always very good. So I don't fear for my safety. I rarely see collusion at the Trop or Taj anyway.
that is all, danny boy :o)
Danny,
In any internet poker room they can review hand histories to spot colussion. You can't do that in a real poker room. (cards are mucked, evidence is lost). Since when does poker room "security" look for colluders? If the cardroom manager is watching the game the colluders see this and don't do anything funny. (duh). Players have to watch out for themselves, speak out, and hope they don't get punched out if they accuse somebody.
This is how it usually works in a real poker room. If an average player thinks somebody is colluding, you avoid playing with them. If you keep your mouth shut, you avoid troble and a lawsuit. A professional might be believed by the cardroom staff. But again, without proof they can't do anything. (They might politely tell the colluder that he should take his business elsewhere).
Bottom line: Its tough to stop collusion in any game, online or real. And you are dreaming if you think the poker staff in most B&M's can spot colluders. The good ones can do it without their knowledge.
Look,
I just gave my opinion of online collusion. I have no fear whatsoever of playing in AC, the staff is completely aware of every game. I just wanted to let people know how easy it is to cheat online. It's the players job to police the game in the casino, and believe me, they do. I feel completely comfortable playing in AC. Online is a different story.
that is all, danny boy :o)
Here's another way of looking at the situation:
Let's say that there is a ton of cheating going on in a major casino (Mirage, Taj, etc.) Is it possible that legal action can be taken against these "legal" US corporations if enough evidence was presented to an attorney? I would think so.
Now, let's take an off-shore poker site and apply the same situation. Who are you going to call if this is going on? The Costa Rican government?
The bottom line is there is that there is less of a need to stop cheating online since there is no immediate threat of an investigation.
Just my two cents...
-á
Collusion Happens! It is easy. It doesn't always have to be done with the specific intent of cheating. Say three guys get in a card room and start playing. using the phone or some other method they start talking. They are not specifically setting out to cheat but suddenly a guy gets AK. He says over the phone "Hey I got AK I am going to make some money!" His friends look at their cards and 1 guy says "Be careful I got "A-6" and the other guy says I got "A-4". Well now the original guy knows that two aces are missing out of the deck. He just reduced his outs significantly and he knows he has. This knowledge contributes significantly to his winning percentage or losing percentage significantly in this hand. Now this is a rare case but overall situations similar will pop up again and again. The increase knowledge of the game will help these players in the long run. Remember that your advantage in any game is slight. By increasing it just a little you gain a significant increase in your overall advantage. Think about it in these terms. If you knew 6 other cards on a table (in Hold Em')with every hand would that help you win an additional BB an hour. I guarentee it would help me becuase it reduces the odds I need to draw or increases the odds. Poker is a game of imperfect knowledge. That's why guys use tells to pick up a hint of what is out there. The closer you get to perfect knowledge the better you will be able to play.
On another note I have read about Caro having designed software that will spot certian types of collusion on Planet Poker. But I do not think you can protect against this type of soft collusion. And I believe that in the end this type of collusion will lose you money if you are playing against it.
"Collusion Happens! It is easy. It doesn't always have to be done with the specific intent of cheating. Say three guys get in a card room and start playing. using the phone or some other method they start talking. They are not specifically setting out to cheat but suddenly a guy gets AK. He says over the phone "Hey I got AK I am going to make some money!" His friends look at their cards and 1 guy says "Be careful I got "A-6" and the other guy says I got "A-4". Well now the original guy knows that two aces are missing out of the deck."
Exactly,
Now suppose they where cheating? Lights out baby. Tournaments MIGHT make it online, but online live poker never will. At least in the tourneys you cant pick and choose your table. But, if its a small field you and your friends would be able to dump chips and increase your win percentage. I'm no cheat, I'm just pointing out some ways to cheat.
I play in pokerpages online tourneys 3 or 4 times a week and absolutely love it. Usually always filled with 200 players, and something to play for too. I'm qualified to play in the TOC if I choose to do so. I'll go to Vegas if I can mangage to win round 3, but being a round 1 winner, I could put up my 2k and play in the TOC. I live in NJ, so I'd also have to put up a plane ticket :o( Why can't the TOC be at the TAJ!! lol
that is all,
danny boy :o)
I can only report one thing that I find on occasion and I try to make sure the mistake is not repeated. There are times that I stumble upon a table that simply cannot be beaten. With those tables, just get up from it as soon as you realize the situation and take steps to protect yourself.
The first thing you should do is take note of the players at that particluar table and keep a log. Watch their stacks vs. the types of cards they win with and track it from session to session. In addition, keep an eye out for "unusual" delays when they need to act, folding before checking, etc. Also take notice of the waiting lists. I have seen "groups" of people at one table for hours with no waiting list with fairly fishy flop percentages while there are huge waiting lists on tables with lower flop percentages. Anyone who plays for profit will know that this is unusual. Even further, take notice of the "red flagged player's" call rate against you. What I mean is, I have seen players bet, raise, fold and call heads up against me as if they knew EXACTLY what I had EVERY single time. I'm talking 100% flawless play without one mistake. Since there are no online tells if you do not use checkboxes and wait 1-2 seconds every time it's your turn to act, the only explanation can be that these players have additional knowledge about the hand...they have the edge. Spot this, and get out.
You'd be suprised at some of the consistencies and inconsistencies you would find if you just study things a bit. However, I feel that these few extra steps can save you money in the long run. Good luck!!
-á
Has anyone else noticed a downturn in the quality of the games at the lower limits, especially 1/2, over the last week or so? In my opinion this is down to the new extended tourney times and new tournament games. Why the hell is Paradise doing this, given they make $10 for every $10 tourney played and can make $10 on a 1/2 table in about 30 hands?
Losing ring game players love tourneys because they can play for ages on a small amount of money and because the results are so random in anything but the very long term. Anyone care to estimate how many tourneys you need to play before skill starts showing out over variance, given that each tourney usually lives or dies on one or two key hands?
The result of this is a massive downturn in the amount of loose money on ring game tables. If this goes on I might just have to start putting up with the Planet interface....
Chris
I've noticed it too.
However, I would hope that the tournaments attract new players to the site and give them a chance to improve their skills without costing them too much. Think of it as customer service.
"It is our policy not to allow any site to post advertisements. (They are welcome to purchase them.) If you are a player who is independent of the site and you wish to state a very positive opinion that's fine, but you need to state that you have no relationship wityh the site (except as a player). Your email addess seems to imply that this is not the case. If that's true, please don't make this type of post anymore. "
Oh yeah, Paradise does purchase them. Disregard this post.
Hopefully Paradise implements the time constraints on the tournies, so they are only for at most 1/3 of the day or 1/4 of the day, that would be great! The new people attracted would play the ring games at non-tourney times.
Given that PP has just recently extended tourney times to 16 hours a day, not much chance of that I fear. More likely tourneys will go 24 hour :(
Chris
I'm a typical internet poker fish. I'll often lose $100 in the side game to you guys while I'm slogging through the first two rounds of my tournament.
Do you feel like Paradise owes you some minimum number of suckers in the ring games? I've stopped laughing now. You get exactly what you deserve for playing there.
Paradise doesn't a damn if you are provided with good games. They will get most of the fresh money that's deposited one way or another.
I disagree with the first post about random results.. I've placed in the money 18/31 tournaments and have made a good amount of money...I think skill shows more in tournament play..however I do agree that luck does have a bit to do with it.
"I think skill shows more in tournament play".
False.
Like I say, I don't believe 31 tournaments is even close to a decent sample size. Last tournament I played came down to me putting another guy allin with 99 for about $1000. He had AJ, and had I won this hand I would have been well placed to win the tourney. Instead he rivered a jack and I was crippled. The rest of the tourney didnt even matter, all that mattered was that key hand. Do you think 31 hands is a good sample size?
Chris
Agreed that 31 is a small sample size, Im up to about 60 now and im at about a 50% ratio of placing. I think skill does show more in tournaments then in ring games. However, they are a different set of skills..but I do think they show more in tournaments. Before the internet professional tournament players played less then these per year, so I do think that this does not mean Im the luckiest player in the world and that skill is obviously a factor.
No limit tournaments are a different story. The problem I have with Paradise tourneys is that the blinds start too small, meaning that the outcome of those hands is pretty meaningless, and then increase too quickly, forcing me allin with marginal hands. I played some tourneys today and did OK... I sat 2 or 3 of them with you, you can probably guess what my handle is.
Chris
I noticed this when the tournaments started in the first place. So....now it's getting even worse... See you at Planet! They're up for major software and server upgrades (they claim). And they have real tournaments...
-JDS
I have played about 10,000 hands with Stuzza on several sites. I have him ranked in the top group of players at every site except Paradise where Angelina is in a group by herself. One of the reasons for the high ranking is he has NO go off factor. Solid, tight and aggressive. Now at a new site, playing several limits below what he usually plays, a player has been making fun of how tight he plays for a couple of days. Showing bluffs, then asking when his book is coming out. I always wonder how a quiet accountant could become an ax murderer. Now I see with enough pressure anything is possible.
Stuzza, below please find your disgraceful hand history.
******************************************************
Game Started on Thu May 10, 2001 @ 15:19 Bijou - Hold'em - 5/10 - Real Money - Hand #1099419
**Hand #1099419 begins**
Basto receives the dealer button
Xenomorph posts small blind 2
Stuzza(72o at PokerSpot) posts big blind 5 <---Js,8h
PokerLegend folds
Truth folds
Drainno raises 10 <--cataylst for tilt
MSsunshine folds
Basto folds
Xenomorph folds
Stuzza calls 5
Flop is dealt [4d,Qc,5d]
Stuzza checks
Drainno bets 5
Stuzza raises 10 <--- 1st toke on the crack pipe "Yeah I can run the loosest player on the site off a hand"
Drainno raises 10
Stuzza raises 10 <---2nd toke on pipe "He doesn't have anything, I got this guy"
Drainno calls 5
Turn is dealt [8c]
Stuzza bets 10 <----"yeah got there"
Drainno calls 10
River is dealt [7c]
Stuzza checks<---"Well, let's have him bluff off some money, but I know I got the nuts."
Drainno checks <--"Damn"
Stuzza shows a pair of Eights
Stuzza's pocket cards were [Js,8h]
Drainno mucks
Stuzza wins $79 play money from main pot YOU THE MAN
**Hand #1099419 ends**
Ah Drainno, did you know Ted Bundy?
In internet poker there is always a record of your bad hands.
----------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your patronage.
http://www.truepoker.com
Both of these players are so weak its incredible, i dont know why we are wasting our time talking about it... paradise!
I decided to try true poker and they wouldn't let me sit at a table after my on-line deposit! The software kept rejecting me (to get on to a table, it accepted my money fine) and I ended up cashing out for my buy-in minus the transaction fees! I would recommend not buying in there. I just got screwed out of my 5%! I couldn't get onto a table and I couldn't cash back out for my full amount!
I emailed their support and have not yet gotten a response. I would wait to buy in if you are thinking about it.
Paul Talbot
Good information, thank you. Please let us know Support's answer.
Mike.
Many Many other players play there with no problems putting in deposit . Why didnt you ask a host there and then???? sounds kinda strange to me I am A big winning player there. It is also very safe as they have pros watchin the tables. 1 clik and u can report anything suspicous. They also have a promo play 100 hands and get 50 bucks nice!!!
Did I do something to piss off PP and so they changed an entry in their database for my account, or something?
I have played there for about a year now and had managed to build up a winning bankroll, but it's all been wiped out in less than a week. I want to know if you think this is a reasonable amount of variance?
I've lost about 200 big bets to bad beats in just the last 40 hours at Paradise Poker. These have occured at the 5/10 to 10/20 tables. Most of these bad beats have been incredible. We're talking opponents getting there with only one or two outs. I've lost several times to full houses getting cracked by quads on the river, plenty of sets on the flop getting cracked to whatever, AK getting beat with a flop of Axx while opponents hold A,garbage, but they get there--- you know, you flop a great hand and invest a lot of chips into it and then someone who has doesn't really know that you have that great of a hand, and would fold if they did, they get there and beat you despite having only a couple of outs.
Time and time again, until 200 big bets have just disappeared in less than a week of tight, good solid play.
I'm a good player who was becoming even better. Maybe too good and tight for Paradise Poker, I don't know. I realize that variance swings will be exaggerated when playing this type of game, but is it reasonable to suffer variance this bad in so short of time with very tight solid play?
Do other good tight, winning players also have similar stories?
Whats your name on paradise?
I would rather not divulge my username publicly. If you wish to discus this privately, please E-mail me at
JaSaGolden@netscape.net
Have other people had experiences similar to this?
Unfortunately they`re scammers, and they probably wouldn`t have a clue as to how to treat their long term customers. And they obviously don`t have any respect for the people who play there, or any respect for honesty and integrity.
Let's split the difference and say you played 200 hours of 8-16, winning poker under normal conditions that would earn $10 per hour. Typical standard deviation for one hour online is maybe 12-15 big bets per hour.
Over 200 hours you lost $3200 plus the $2000 you would expect to win for a total of $5200 (325 big bets). This makes your series SD = 325 / Sqrt (200) or 23 big bets per hour. Your series is roughly two standard deviations away from mean, a tragedy but not too unusual.
Quit Paradise and remove the nagging doubt from your mind. I sleep much better now.
40 hours, not 200 like I first calculated, make some difference. $3600/ sqrt (40) = 569. = 36 big bets/hour. That puts you into 3 standard deviation territory, unusual stuff indeed. Still possible given an honest game but that's a big assumption.
I suspect that almost everyone who's has played there much has experienced the same thing, although 40 hours (out of?) is tough. The worst downswings I've seen in over 2000 hours of online play have been $3525, $3098 and $1895, playing generally between $3-6 and $10-20, but it always turns around.
Ok. Calm down. I know it’s tough to go through a streak like that, but did you really lose 200 BB’s to bad beats in just a week? That seems unlikely to me.
Every time I’ve struggled on Paradise Poker, I’ve taken a very hard look at my play and I always find places where I’ve been making some fairly big mistakes. I’m not saying that you’re misleading anyone, but have you honestly and closely examined your play? That's what I strongly recommend that you do.
At any rate, I really do wish you the best of luck (except when you’re playing again me). I hope things turn around for you because I often think that there but for the grace of God could go I.
stocksnaces,
High7lander played for a year winning and building his bankroll. He takes a devastating nose dive for a week, loses his bankroll, and you say it happened because he probably has leaks in his game. Did he have these leaks for the year he was winning, or are they newly developed? Was he just incredibly lucky for that year, and losing 200 BB in a week is about what he should expect, given that he would have to be less than clueless?
Tom D
Good question and the answer is yes, absolutely, positively, yes! I’ve closely examined every hand and burned up PP’s mailing server with all my requests. Yea, I made a couple of mistakes-- missed a bet here and there, who doesn’t, but nothing that would explain this massacre.
It first started when I had a great full boat in the 8/16 game busted on the river by a straight flush! Only one card possible and my opponent gets there. No problem, I just shake it off cause these things will happen, you know? Next few days, great flops would suck me into hands and some underdog opponent would come out on top. One right after the other—-again and again and again. No collusion, just tons of losing beats. A few winning hands but not many.
What about the fact that a few of my hands would have been flagged to Paradise? I sometimes do lay down AQ before the flop when I think it’s trash. What good player wouldn’t if a tight UTG raises and he gets raised by tight wad #2 and you are in mid position? Would you call that bet??? It’s very reasonable to assume that someone has AK or AA or KK or QQ. I understand that would get flagged to Paradise and they would look at it. Yea I sometimes do lay down a hand on the turn where my betting may look suspicious. Is that a crime? If you read S&M, that’s the way that you sometimes do it, ok?
Do we have some employee back there who doesn’t really understand poker strategy think that what I’m doing is fishy cause I swear that I’m totally honest in my play and would never cheat, ok? I wouldn’t even know how.
I am going down so spectacularly fast right now it’s as if PP is saying that they don’t want my business and playing even tighter doesn’t help. I’ll keep trying but it will be with much more caution.
I understand that would get flagged to Paradise and they would look at it. Yea I sometimes do lay down a hand on the turn where my betting may look suspicious. Is that a crime?
I don't believe Paradise has published their criteria for investigating hands or players.
Do we have some employee back there who doesn’t really understand poker strategy think that what I’m doing is fishy cause I swear that I’m totally honest in my play and would never cheat, ok? I wouldn’t even know how.
I suspect that if Paradise thought you were cheating they would close your account rather than try to cheat you.
This is always a tough situation. If you play enough hours strange things weill happen. That doesn't mean that the game is fair. It may not be. It also doesn't mean it isn't fair. My own personal experience (500 hours in 4 months) leads me to believe that the site is honest (I can't vouch for the players).
The only thing you can do is what you are already doing (keeping accurate records). Good luck with whatever you decide.
I feel your pain... (No constructive advice here xcept just keep that solid play...)
Sincerly, Andreas
CASHOUT and dont come back for at least a month.
It's most likely luck and idiots catching up to you, why pay then off, just go and play somewhere else.
Pretend you are starting over from scratch.
there is a formula for this--I do not recall rxactly, but it goes something like this--that # which seems reasonable PLUS several more EQUALS # which is unreasonable! Seriously though, I know how you feel. Starting with small bankroll, playing HE, 3&6, then up to 5&10--slowly built up to nearly 900 winner--suddenly, all gone within 2 days!!!- ??? Jim
Does someone have a good estimate of the average amount of hands dealt at Paradise.
(For instance someone with more than 1000 hours logged...ask your number of hands played at customer support, and divide them by the hours you logged)
Thanks
Recently while playing on Trupoker with MS SUNSHINE, they proceded to tell the entire table how they were owed 56,000 by pokerspot. This was confirmed to not be a typo and since i see this joker posts on this forum, i would like to take a simple sample of opinions from the posters of this site as to the validity of this claim. FYI they claimed to have only had 1600 into the site in total deposits, and were awaiting a total payout of 56,000, again e-stated so as not to be a typo.
Well guys,
I have played with ms @ pokerspot for quite some time. Their br is quite large. 56K is about right. About 1 or 2 others are in the 20k range. I was at 35K before I hit a terrible terrible run..see post "33 days of hell" They and I and others put in many many hours there. At times 14-20 hours a day. So anyway I am rambling but yes I belive their claim to be valid.
Will the poll make a difference in how you play against MS Sunshine or will it effect their play against you? I think not. Let me ask you a question. Don't you have better things to do besides trying to belittle someone? Or maybe you are a real authority on jokers (like Bill Murray was an authority on ghosts)! I've played many hours with MS Sunshine and they are not the joker in the deck and will stick it to you where the sun don't shine if they haven't already.
Not so Kind Regards
LOL and Amen!
Guess who J and L?
Kind Regards,
G (the hd)
Why is "MS Sunshine" referred to in the plural repeatedly? Is he'she a siamese twin?
Just an aside, let this be a lesson not to leave $$ in great amounts on any poker site.
They are husband and wife. Good players (they play separately)and good people from Mississippi.
To title your post like that is both presumptuous and ignorant. Why do you assume that it must be a lie? If you based your statements on knowledge and analysis, instead of on idiocy and cynicism, you would know:
> the Pokerspot 20/40 table used to be by far the softest high-limit table online. This was a goldmine for many good players for several months.
> I believe the 56K figure includes the 20% bonus that Pokerspot added to the overdue accounts. So the actual win is closer to 47K.
> Winning 2 BB/hr. at 40 hrs./week for 15 weeks at 20/40 limits is a total of $48,000.
Now I'm not saying that I know for a fact what MS Sunshine has won at Pokerspot. It's really none of my (or your) business. But given these factors, the figure certainly seems reasonable.
Also, I have personally played with MS Sunshine several times, and can attest to both of them being very good players, and two of the friendliest people I've ever played with.
They really have no reason to lie. The few times I've heard them mention the figure, it has never been as a boast, but only to express the frustration that we all are going through with Pokerspot.
So, before you go proclaiming that they are liars, have some kind of basis for your argument.
Why if you won 40-50g at an online poker site would you not cash out say 10,000 every week. To leave all that money there is just insane. The skill and brains need to win that kind of money is great, you should be smart enough to request a cashout when your roll get to be so high. By the way where is all that money? If pokerspot does not have it, and the players obviously dont have it, where is it? MS Sunshine if you really had a 50k roll one or both these things are true.
1. The $ does not mean that much to you
2. You got immense pleasure every time you logged in and saw you bank roll, and you did not want the ride to end.
Dear Skeptic, although we have been unwilling to defend ourselves against Paradise's accusations, you have asked legitimate questions, we believe out of curiousity, and here are your answers:
In January of this year, we managed to turn $1600 into about $13,000 playing short-handed 20/40 at PokerSpot. We cashed out 10gs, or "requested" a cashout to be specific, and left ourselves $3500 to play on. That cashout, and the ones to follow, were not, and still have not, been processed or paid due to PokerSpot's financial difficulties.
Throughout February, we won another 10-12 grand, and again "requested" a 10+ grand cashout, still leaving money to play on. Same M.O. in March and April. We were winning consistently, and sending for cashouts just as consistently. So far, we have received exactly nothing. But we keep a bankroll there and continue to play there in the hopes that someday they'll get back on their feet. What else can we do?
I hope this answers your questions, thank you for your kind inquiry.
MS Sunshine
Thank you for your timely answers.
What did you mean when you said that Paradise accused you of something? What are you unwilling to defend yourself against? I dont know what you are talking about.
Thanks in advance
Skeptic, I didn't mean Paradise Poker, I meant AKA Paradise, the person who started this thread by accusing us of lying about our winnings.
WOW! Thank you Ryan (and WhoCares?) for your very kind comments. It's always great to hear that our play is respected, but even better to hear that we are the nice and friendly couple that we strive to be. Please say hello next time you're in Tunica.
AKA, as many of the other players have stated, I do not have any doubt to their claim. I played with MS a large portion of those hours at PokerSpot. I couldn't possibly have records on how much each players earns but... * Pokerspot definately had a very soft game * Most of the time the game was shorthanded allowing a better rate per hour for good play (up to 3 big blinds per hour) * Pokerspot definately had a very soft game. Oh, I already said that. * MS played many hours there as whenever I went there MS was there * Pokerspot definately had a very soft game, ditto. * MS is a very good player * There were some other players with very large winnings earned during the same time period
Hours plus skill plus soft players equals big winnings.
I'd be careful playing with MS if I were you. See you at TruePoker sometime
Puravida
Many Many other players play there with no problems putting in deposit . Why didnt you ask a host there and then???? sounds kinda strange to me I am A big winning player there. It is also very safe as they have pros watchin the tables. 1 clik and u can report anything suspicous. They also have a promo play 100 hands and get 50 bucks nice!!! Hi Mike haven hows poker.com going
Hi, CT.
Thanks for that endorsement and for clearing up any doubt. See you there, soon.
Mike.
The BEST form of poker can now be played for cash at planetpoker.com
8 hands later this happened:
Game #xxxxxxxx - $20/$40 Hold'em Table "Glover Reef" (real money) --
Dealing...Dealt to me [ Ks ]Dealt to me [ Kd ]
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $777 | Rake: $3Board: [ 3s 2c 8d 3d 7h ]
Player 1 lost $100 (folded)
Player 2 lost $140 (folded)
me bet $180, collected $777, net +$597 (showed hand) [ Ks Kd ] (two pair,kings and threes)
Player 3 lost $80 (folded)
Player 4 lost $100 (folded)
Player 5 lost $180 [ Qh Qs ] (two pair, queens and threes)
Looks like Paradise have sorted out the "cashout bug" :)
Don't worry, You'll be back crying in no time!
How stupid was that post? What is your point? Do you feel such a compelling need to defend Paradise because you're filled with nagging doubt?
One hand makes for a pretty small sample size. Perhaps we could try to make assumptions for just a single river card if the absurd were our goal.
What is the point? If I post a bad beat following a cash out will the bug be deemed as rife?
This is bad news.
It can only mean they have designed in a time lag response to cash outs.
LOL
...that it may actually be the case.
I have cashed out three times this last week (yes it's been a good week). On the last cash-out today, the mail said that none of this money was yet sent, and that I would receive a single check for the whole amount. There was 6 1/2 day (five business days) between the first and the last cash-out and none of it has been even sent as of yet.
lars
Well I cashed out some money and received the cheque 7 days later. The past 30 hours since cashing out have been the most profitable since I started playing. I'm still waiting for the cash-out-monster to get me.
Can someone compare and contrast $0.50-$1.00, $1-$2, $2-$4 and $3-$6 at paradise. I have played $0.50-$1.00 and $1-$2 and find them very easy to beat. Is this still the case with $2-4 and higher?
2/4 is a totally diff kettle of fish be careful
Very difficult question. I find the quality of play at Paradise a very interesting matter.
$.5/1 is, not surprisingly, the easiest limit. However, the way I see it, is that all the way up to $10/20 (probably even including $10/20), the games are harder for each limit (usually), but the increase in limit does not compare with the increase of quality level. I think too little separates the quality levels of your average $2/4 table to $5/10. In other words, if you have the bankroll for $5/10 and beat $2/4, you'd be better off playing $5/10, as you'd probably beat that limit too, and for better money.
This definitely is true for $3/6 and $5/10. I think next to nothing separates the limits in terms of quality level. If you beat $3/6, play $5/10 instead.
On last note here is that I think you could easily find yourself in a $1/2 game that is as tough as an average $3/6 or $5/10. Of course $1/2 is usually softer, but it pretty close.
Mid-limits are the gold mine of Paradise Poker in my opinion.
lars
It's not the limit but the table composition who cares.
Many times I started playing a table full of tight players and suddendly that table became a loose one. The opposite fact is even worse. You have to know every single opponent to have a good profit and it's not easy to find in a table where we are against .
Marco
Hi
I think the difference between 3-6 and 5-10 is huge. You see a lot of bad plays on both limits for sure, but some of the better 5-10 players are way beyond the level of the better 3-6 players. Keep a record of these good players (and a record of the fish).
The 10-20 is on average filled with ok players, but on the evenings and in the weekends you see a lot of fish coming in, only to get cleaned out unless they hit a lucky streak. The game is notably more aggressive than the 5-10 in my oppinion.
The 15-30 and above is really aggressive, and it takes a good player to beat these games consistantly. Most players I know do the mistake of building a bankroll adequate for playing 5-10 / 10-20. Then the proceed to the high limits and get swept away by the players there. It happens a lot. I see it every week. It's a sad story.
"Can someone compare and contrast $0.50-$1.00, $1-$2, $2-$4 and $3-$6 at paradise. "
1/2 and a $1 limit is where the rookie colluders begin their education. It's small stakes but they must learn somewhere.
1-2 and 2-4 will put you in amongst a more experienced class of cheat, still not enough to earn a good living but it supplements the AFDC and SSI.
3-6 and up are real money makers for the seasoned colluder. They won't personally thank you for the money you send their way but I assure you they're grateful.
I think there should be a separate discussion group for crazy paradise conspiracies. Some of us can beat these games collusion or not. Apparently these theories are easier to swallow than bad play.
No collusion tends to pick up at the higher limits. I'm not saying that all these games are. You just have to look for certain "signs".
-á
I've given some thought to opening an account on poker.com, but I'd like to hear about some of you's experiences with this outfit before I commit any money. Any opinions?
Thanks! Guy
They only allow Canadians to play for fun, not money, on their website.
For those who are curious, I just recieved payment in the form of a bank check from pokerspot. True, I did request the cashout almost 5 weeks ago, but at least it came.
Just thought I'd pass that along.
I got one as well. I'm tempted to sell the damn thing for 75% of face. I doubt there are any takers.
Ah. Mine looked fairly official-- it came from someplace called the 'bank of Nevis-- so I never considered that it might not clear.
Has anyone else had a problem with these checks bouncing?
I got the same check. It's got a check number lower than my personal account. My fingers are crossed.
Pokerspot has bounced checks before, but they were not "bank drafts". A bank draft cannot bounce as I understand it.
The check I recived from "the bank of nevis" was just fine. Was for several; thousand and it cleared np. so I'm going to try it one more time there. Good luck everyone.
First of all: Thank you Derrick Ashworth and Greg Raymer for answering my 4-straigh, 4-flush draw question around easter. I didn't make it back from a vacation, to answer, before my question had scrolled of the forum.
I am curious, especially about hearing from americans what you think of this little thought I've had. When I deposited $100 at Paradise that was about 1000 Swedish Crowns/Kronor (the exchange rate is at an all-time low). To follow The Economists standard for comparing buying power between countries they use the BigMac index. For $100 bucks in Sweden you get 34,50 BigMacs with no accessories. $100 is also about 1/15 of an average low-post high scool educated monthly salary or 1/23-1/60 of a newly-bred.
Let's say I play 3-6 Texas Hold'em, then I bet one BigMac in the big blind. My thought is that what you get for $3 as an american player if you were to spend it on something other than a big blind, is a lot more than I get. Or conversely a big blind is a lot cheaper buying-powerwise. My question is, do Americans play looser on the lower limits, not just because low-limit players are usually less skilled regardless of nationality, but also because $3 is not so much money in the U.S.?
We all hear about tough beats, downswings etc etc. Why don't we share some ideas on how best to cope with this. I mean, tilting when we are taking beats affects us all. Any ideas would be great for discussion, from getting a cup of tea, to simply not playing for the rest of the day. What do you guys find most effective? Do you find it reasonable to expect to keep playing well after horrific beatings? Love to hear from you all.
Miles--
Actually, there are quite a few players who don't get rattled at all by a series of drubbings-- or who at least have unusually high threshholds. Personally, I can usually go in for about 40 BB's before I start getting pissed, so I try to keep my losses for any given session below this point.
Remember that poker is nothing but a series of random, neutral events. And read "Zen and the Art of Poker" by Larry Phillips.
Good luck, Guy
Read Mason's "Gambling Theory and Other Topics."
What about it.
There's no such thing as "bad" beat. Poker is a long-term game played by short-term animals who use phrases like this to express their psychological unsuitability to the game. I don't want to sound too superior here because I have the same problem, although it's diminished over time. But I recognize it (sounding like Gen. Ripper here) as a problem with my attitude caused by the wrong perspective on what I'm doing.
Unless you don't know what you're doing or have a bankroll problem, so-called bad beats aren't a downside, a disadvantage, an unpleasantry or a price to pay, or anything that's remotely negative. They're just one manifestation of what makes poker beatable and worth pursuing. If there's a proper attitude toward them it's probably cheerful indifference. Imagine if Gloucester fisherman went about speculating how much easier their job would be if it weren't for this fucking ocean! It's that silly.
Anyone that references General Ripper can't be all bad.
.
You Mr Man, are going to have to answer to the CocaCola Company
In Andy Glazer's WSOP coverage of the $3000 Omaha Split, he wrote,
"I wish I could have just been reporting on the hands and the traps and the value bets, instead of the stuff that became the bigger story. Scotty Nguyen is a worthy champion and a great poker player. I wish I could just be writing about that.
So was it a case of what goes around, comes around? (for Phil) Was it a case of a great, justifiably popular and often gracious champion (Scotty) simply using every tool at his disposal, or did he go too far? Does my knowledge of what kind of guy Phil Hellmuth is away from the poker table, a loyal, honorable friend and good family man, color my judgment too much when he's playing at the poker table, when Dr. Jekyll turns into Mr. Hyde? I can't answer those questions. It's hard enough even asking them.
I wish to hell I didn't have to ask them.
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde?! Could we be just a little more melodramatic? THIS IS PART OF POKER! Slow-rolling, criticizing, slamming cheques onto the table, looking at your opponent and then back at your hand a million times (a patented Hellmuth move) these are all measures taken in an effort to throw someone off their game. And really, when we're only talking about throwing WORDS, can there be such a thing as going too far, when hundreds of thousands of dollars are at stake? I don't think so. Poker is a sport, and just like any other, every edge must be taken advantage of if you want to come out on top. Way to go, Scotty!
Maybe they should have taken away both their chat privaleges. (lol). Never too seen a slow roll on paradise.
Although some of ploys aren't that horrible to take advantage of you could easily go to far. I mean if you had a sure-fire way of putting people on tilt and used this ploy everytime you played it would just be poor sportsmanship. It's bad poker and bad for poker.
Sincerly, Andreas
Les, I know what you mean! Upon reading report on game as posted on pokerpages, it was clear Phil was miffed -- of all people, and him a pro? But no, I don't think it was unfair nor overdone. Jim
Is there a way to change seats at paradise poker without having to leave and come back?
Thanks
No
Not unless the software has recently been changed.
No, but unlike Pokerspot you can actually choose your seat when you first sit, rather than leaving and coming back hoping to randomly end up in the seat you want.
One question:
How has the play of live games changed since the advent of online poker?
In our area it seems to be a balanced affect. We have lost some playing time of cardroom players to the online sites, but have gained new players who learned playing poker online.
I haven't played on their site yet, so I'm just wondering if any of the 2+2 readers have played there and to get some feedback on their software/site comparing to Paradise Poker. Thanks!
paradise is better
Let me qualify my answer:
Play for fun - Definitely True Poker Play for real money - Definitely Paradise
Hi,
I was looking around on their site and I don't see any mention of the free $50. I am probably just blind. Can you point me in the right direction?
Tapping cane...tap tap..tap tap...
Joe
I haven't been back to the site yet, but this a copy of the e-mail they sent me a couple of days ago:
It's easy to qualify:
1. Sign up for Real Money Play (current Real Money players already meet this step) 2. Play at least 100 Qualifying Real Money Hands* by May 20, 2001 12:01 a.m. (Antigua Time) 3. TruePoker credits each qualifying real money player's Account with $50.00**.
So stop by. Play a few hands. See some old friends or make new ones. And earn some easy money.
See you there!
TruePoker Crew admin@truepoker.com www.truepoker.com
PS - Current real money players will be credited with 25 hands, or total real money hands played, whichever is less.
(*Play means being dealt in as an active player at a real money table) (*Qualifying Real Money Hands means a real money hand in which the pot equals or exceeds $20.00) (The Promotion will end at 12:01 a.m., May 20, 2001, Antigua time) (**The number of qualifying real money players shall be limited to the first 500 players to play 100 Qualifying Hands each. Each player may only qualify once and no player may play more than one account.)
I like True poker's software. They have a couple of hundred players in the "play money section" every night. The "live" section has about three games. A $1-2 HE,$2-4 HE or $3-6 HE and then $5-10 HE or $10-20 HE. I have mostly played in the $10-20 game but have played the lower games too. The games are soft. In the upper game you have a player who yaks alot, but plays almost every hand.
The software has a couple of features I like. The chat appears over a player's head and in the chat box, which is floating and can be sized.
They have a large selection of characters to choose from. Even thou I'm not a big fan of sounds, the different voices for each is pretty cool.
It seems that they will continue to have promotions. I like poker rooms that give away money that is easy to get. This $50 was a breeze.
I still haven't decided what I think about the "look at your holecards" feature. You do pick up tells on some players, but if they did not have this the speed would be on par with Paradise.
It's pretty easy to find players around the site.
I'm planning to stick with them for awhile to see if the player base will pick up to the point that there is always at least one large game.
MS Sunshine
Standard disclaimer:
I'm not in any way associated with TruePoker or any other poker site. If I was, I would push for more reasonable rakes found in most card rooms across the country except CA.
I have played truepoker since the day it opened for real money and found that almost all the games the softest any where online.The look at your cards features and the players talking are pretty cool.But I myself have got sick of the sounds and had to turn them off.This site is probably the slowest online but is visually nice to look at.I would have to say that is the closest site online to playing in real life that you will find anywhere.I have yet to cashout but I am curious to see how fast their cashouts are.I would be amazed if they were as fast as the highlandsclub.If anyone wants something new truepoker is the site to play-games are very good.If anyone is interested in another new site now playing for real money -check out www.ultimatebet.com.They have about 15 world class players putting their names on the line for the site.Their software is very fast like paradise and is not an eyesore.Also I do not work for any site -I just play almost all of them.
Thanks for all the feedbacks. I think I'll give them a try.
i got my $50.00 bonus
I was somewhat shocked and very pleased to find a check for $331 in my mailbox from Pokerspot. I started there with $250 and had played one time only before their problems began. Never thought I'd see my money.
Hi. Here is an interesting Planet 3-6 hand I played this morning that I'd like some comments on.
I'm on the button with 99. There are 4 callers to me. The blinds are very loose. I raise and everyone calls. I'm pretty much hoping to flop a set here.
pot = 13 SB at this point
Flop = Jh 7c 8h
Not exactly a great flop for my hand. I'm hoping everyone checks around to me to get a free card. Unfortunately, the guy right before me bets. Now this player has automatically bet with anything in a large pot when it's checked around to him in last or 2nd to last position. The pot is very large at this point and my hand might be good, I have maybe 6 outs (most likely 3) if I'm beat already and could also redraw if a 9 hits on the turn. What do you do here?
I raised hoping to make people fold and increase my chance of winning the pot. The small blind cold calls which I'm not too happy about and the original better calls.
pot = 8 BB.
Turn = 9h which completes a flush draw, a straight draw, and my set. SB checks (if he has flush, he bets here), original better bets into me. He is a deceptive player and could be betting the scare card as a bluff. What do you do now?
--results to follow.
Thanks,
Jeff
I raised the turn figuring I wouldn't be reraised except by nut flush and since I wanted to see this one to the end anyway, I would spend the same money if I lost (2 BB) and get an extra bet if my full house comes through. Anyway, the SB cold called 12 which made me think straight and the original better folded to my raise.
The river was the 5c making any 6 or 10 a straight not to mention the flush possibilities from before. The SB checked to me. I checked too figuring I was beaten when he turned over A7o and I took down a nice 14 BB pot.
Thanks for the comments-
Jeff
I don't like your raise on the turn. I would reraise you with the nut straight or a flush. I would put you on an overpair with a big flush draw until you told me differently (capped the turn). Then I would make the crying call with either of these holdings.
You are definitely in danger of being bet into on river by me any way.
Derrick
Very interesting hand.
Preflop raise is correct.
Flop raise is suspect. You are probably behind, this board has probably hit a couple of people so you are unlikely to scare many off and you don't really have a lot of outs. Your two 9 outs are of little help and one of your four 10 outs will put the third heart of the board.
However, you are definately getting proper odds to call.
On the turn, you call. You are probably behind but you have 10 outs to the full house giving you roughly 4 to 1 to win 9 to 1.
You should also call all raises (if a checkraise is in play by the SB) as you will still get proper odds.
If a blank hits on the river you probably have to make a crying call unless both the small blind leads and the other player calls in which case I might fold.
Before I read your results I will comment.
I like the raise on the flop. You are representing a big pair here with your preflop raise. The pot is large, and you want to increase your chance of winning it.
On the turn, I would call. You have 10 outs which you are easily getting odds on. You may even be ahead... I doubt it, but you may be.
derrick
Hi all, a few days ago I posted a pretty negative statement about truepoker.com because I was able to buy in but not sit down at the games and could only cash out the buy-in minus the fees.
I have heard back from Truepoker and they are refunding the fees and trying to figure out what went wrong.
I haven't heard of anyone else having the same problem and since they did refund all monies, purchasing chips there does not seem to be the problem that I thought it was. It is also encouraging that the site did the right thing and refunded the 5% fee.
I'm still hoping to be able to play there, I was just really pissed when I thought I had lost 5% on my purchase.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
anyone kept track of how many hands Truepoker is getting out per hour in a full game? I am sure they are slower than paradise but was just wondering...
Derek
Hi, anyone have a method of getting Paradise hand histories consistently? I always forget to get them every 100 hands, and because of this, I am missing chunks of my past play. I always play for maybe 2 hours before I remember I need to request my last 100 hands. Is there a way to get more than the last 100 hands?
I'm thinking of making a program to automatically request hand histories every set interval, even!
- Tony
Why not just get 10 every time you are on the button?
If you know what you are doing with your mail program you could set it so that it automatically appends new messages to a file in a seperate folder so you will end up with one long text file of all your hands.
Paul Talbot
Get one of those electronic countdown timers (cost about $8) that they use in tournaments and for cooking food in kitchen.
If you're playing use table they set it for about 1 hr 45 mins to sound off. For two tables, set it for about 55 minutes. Then when it buzzes, request 100 hands and reset the timer.
Thx for the advice! Great idea.
There are also alarm programs you could download and use as a countdown timer on your pc.
They probably have some at davecentral.com
Drink 5 Bud. Get HHs. Drink 5 Bud. Get HHs. Drink 5 Bud. gets 5 Hhs. drink shome Bud. get another case. drinl
If you've been playing online for a year or more you've already been victimized by deliberate all-ins more times than you can remember. So much attention is given to the problem of collusion, but all-in angling is far more pervasive and results, I believe, in much higher losses to the average player. I estimate my losses around $1000/yr in 3-6 and 5-10 limit from this form of cheating and in the vast majority of these cases the offending players were fully connected but simply let the clock run out (only Paradise actually notes this distinction in the chat by saying the player " did not act in time " as opposed to " lost contact "). These players are sent warnings and either stop or eventually ( after however many more instances ) are suspended or have their accounts closed. This is no consolation or compensation to all the people they have cheated, and there is always another angler signing up to take their place. Unlike " successful " colluders, these individuals operate openly and are easy to identify - all poker sites have software that can determine if a player was connected when their time to act expired. Why then are honest players continually subjected to abuse by an endless parade of petty thieves and pick-pockets who simply let the clock run out? Why do the online sites give all-in protection to players THEY KNOW are connected? Support staff will refer to " emergencies " and " freeze-up " as reasons to justify a policy that results in incessant cheating. How about this: Hey...you got an " emergency " in the middle of your hand? Your hand will be folded! Tough luck! Your computer keeps freezing? Too bad...GET IT FIXED! The REAL reason they give all-in protection to connected players is because they know that if they auto-folded these hands then more players - particularly those in a bad mood - would simply let time expire when they intended to fold; so we are all paying the cost - financially and pschologically - of keeping the games moving as fast as possible. If enough people scream about this policy they might change it. A petition with a few thousand names...if you agree with me let's put some pressure on!
I've just been viewing and posting on 2+2 for a few months now and I'm quite surprised no one hasn't brought this up before now. I agree with you but I don't think anything will be done about it. The first time I experienced this was when I was on the button in a 20-40 HE game at Pokerspot. I had 10-10 and everyone folded to me and I raised. The SB folded then the BB's ticker started running. PS has a unique part of their software where as soon as it gets to a player a 20 second clock starts and it is seen by all. It got down to 0 seconds and then either a "Timed Out" or "ALL-In" box appeared over the players seat (can't remember which). Then all 5 cards came out: something like 9 8 3 2 2. It then flashed the winners message across the screen stating that the BB wins $50 with 3 2's! His hand showed 2 7 offsuit! I said "what the ????"! What added insult to injury it also flashed "holdemdude wins $20 with a pair of 10's. The $20 was my own raise that he didn't call. His reply was what really got me: "Oh I just used one of my all-ins. It's part of the game dude, get used to it". I was appalled! I did proceed to email the sites support team and they tried to say in a nice way that that there was no way to distiguish whether or not the player did it on purpose or not. I told them to go back and read the chat! You can't get any more distinguished than that (LOL)! There also have been times on occassion where I accidently timed out due to a potty break, etc... and didn't make it back on time. I don't think I've ever drug a dime. There have been times though that the thought crossed my mind to use this rule (is it a rule or a man made glitch?) when the pot is extremely large early in the hand and I have something like 88 and the flop is all paint, you know what I mean. When it's an automatic fold but the 2-outer will get there eventually. I just can't bring myself to do that. All I can say is dishonesty will "always" catch up with you no matter what. I've had the pleasure of playing with this player quite a bit and having him fatten my BR just about every time I sat with him.
Although I have ceased play at PS for some time now, it looks as if they are starting to make good on what many of thought was a financial disaster.
If you get something together, let me know.
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
In lots and lots and lots of hours of play, I have had three times where I was timed out all-in and yet still "connected." I think Paradise has done an excellent job of handing the situation each time. Let me say that not one of the times did I time out on purpose. One time was due to my own mistake/not paying attention and the other two were because of the hand histories bug I mention below. Each and every time, Paradise demanded an explanation e-mail from me as to why I timed out while still connected. I also had one day where I had used my all-in protection already and was then timed out again on a very big hand. This was when Paradise was having routing problems and they awarded me the amount of the pot I would have won but was folded out of from their own coffers. (WOW!).
If people are using this to angle-shoot, I can't imagine them getting away with it for very long. If YOU complain to support@paradisepoker.com with the hand #'s and tell them why you think the person is angle-shooting by timing out they will take care of it. If you believe you have lost money because of it, then you should put that in the e-mail as well. I have ran into only two instances where the other player was 'probably' using this to cheat in about a gazillion hours of play.
One bug that Paradise's software used to have, I'm not sure if it still does is that if you request a hand history during a hand, sometimes on the next betting round, you get no buttons to act and the checkboxes do not work. Another problem is that if you are doing other things, such as surfing or using another program while playing, your computer can start swapping/doing other tasks and cause you to time out. Yes, I know you should be paying attention and not surfing/holding up the game. 99.99999 percent of the time, I do NOT hold up the game by reading/surfing while I play. You mention people's PC's freezing up..I am sure that happens too. These people are not "angle shooting". They are simply a victim of windows being flaky. Most people have flaky dial-up connections that cause a lot of problems. I finally got a cable modem which has solved all of my connection/latency problems. If you are paying for a 2nd phone line and a dial up account, I would strongly suggest you get cable/DSL. It costs about the same as a phone line+dial up account and is wonderful.
Anyways, with the Internet being as flaky as it is, and Windows being flaky too, I think Paradise has came up with a fair solution to the problems people encounter when trying to play in real time. I am constantly amazed at how well their software works. People may abuse this for one or two hands but Paradise will kick them off if you report them. They will probably kick them off even if you don't. They also might compensate you for the losses. I would love to see some of your hand histories. $1000 is a bunch to loose because of this. I have just not seen that many instances of people using the time-out to cheat. It also doesn't gain them that much. They can't put in any more bets...the only place where they really gain is that you cannot bet them off a weak hand or make them pay to draw.
The time I was busy surfing/reading and did not act on my hand (the table window did not get focus when it was my turn like it normally does). By the time it beeped at me and popped up the little "You have timed out" window, there was nothing I could do. I would have preferred to fold my hand even though it won the side pot rather than have even one of the players at the table think I was cheating and have to write a stupid explanation e-mail to Paradise. Paradise should allow you to concede the pot in these situations. I am sure that almost everyone with any playing hours at all on PP has gotten distracted at one point or another during a hand and had this happen. I just think the 1 all-in is a necessary evil in the online poker world as long as it is policed properly and in my experience, PP has done a great job of that.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Best regards,
Joe
...
Chris Alger states that you are just a whining loser. No one ever cheats on Paradise Poker. Chris also states that the way to make a million dollars is to always raise K-10o in late position in every game. Try this on Paradise Poker 20-40 and post the results. Chris will not cover your losses.
It has been a very long time since I have suspected somone deliberately going all-in. I did see it a lot last year so maybe Paradise changed its approach.
As a "funny" aside - I once was having connection problems and used my allin in the SB. Next hand I have the nuts on the river in a huge pot. Bham. Connection goes out I take take a very bad beat.
I like your post Mr President.
I agree that allin cheating is at least as big a problem as collusion. Maybe Paradise is tough but other sites are not. On Planet Poker I recently reported a VERY obvious allin cheat to support, and I asked them to bar that player. They told me they would not do that. Depending on severity and how many times it happens they would either refuse to reset that players allins or just remove the allin ability of that account. I dont think thats good enough. That player did not like the betting on the river and chose to let time run out. That was cheating and should be punished. As long as Planet is so soft, allin cheaters will continue to operate there. I understand that sometimes you dont pay enough attention and time runs out. Not every allin with a good connection should be punished. Mistakes happens. But the must severe offenders should be barred. Just like collusion it is cheating and must be stoped.
Anders
No all-in protection? That is a pretty tough penalty. Planet is doing the right thing with that. Why loss a customer if they can no longer do the thing they have been warned about? I don't think I would play without all-in protection if other players had theirs. Talking about playing without a net.
MS Sunshine (mr)
You have no all-in protection? Well, I'm going to take my time throwing this busted draw away at the river.
your response:"No all-in protection? That is a pretty tough penalty" "I don't think I would play without all-in protection if other players had theirs"
I don't know what you think I was saying, but nowhere in my post is there any suggestion that players who are disconnected should not receive all-in protection, nor did I propose that some should have it and some others not.My stated position is that giving all-in protection to players who are determined by the software as being connected when their time to act expires is completely unneccessary, innappropriate and results in significant losses ( over time ) to concientious players.
Have you read Anders post to which Ms Sunshine was replying?
I was saying , if planet takes away a player's all-in protection for abusing it, that this was a stiff penalty. I'll try to be clearer in my post in the future.
Ms Sunshine
My mistake - I overlooked that you were responding to Anders' post, not mine. Sorry...carry on.
Report the hand number for review to support@paradisepokder.com. They will review it, and give you an explanation. If you ask they often reward you with what you should have been given for that hand.
Derrick
While they are certainly people making deliberate allins, I believe that most are accidental, and about 85% of the people accused of cheating are innocent. Just consider how often you have been accused of cheating after an accidental all in.
Someone who admits it as Gene recounts is probably bull-shiting. Trying to make a fool of the accuser.
To me its not that big an issue. However one possible solutions, is to make people have to claim money for an all in, rather than the current situation where they get it whether they want it or not.
The All-In protection is necessary at Paradise. I have gone all-in while connected many time, mostly due to the following bug:
Sometimes when it is your turn to act, the paradise clien t sends the alert beep, but the action buttons do not appear. What ensues then is frantic clicking any possible way to do something, usually to now avail and I spend the rest of the hand all-in. Usually this happens preflop but it has happened at other stages in the hand too.
Sometimes though I time out while connected because I fell asleep at my desk :{
Wardy
Hi,
I’m project manager for a new online poker game (preview at www.riverkingdom.com). I need some help in figuring out a good policy for the behavior of our application at showdown. I’ve looked at other online poker games and discovered that they all have a different approach.
Here is the problem:
Assume that 3 players made it to the showdown (A, B and C). Player A was the last to bet. B and C called.Naturally one thinks that A has to show his cards but should there be an option? Should it be possible for player A to muck/fold his cards instead? Should B be able to muck/fold his cards?
I think that the wrong behavior in this situation can favor collusion which we want to prevent as much as possible.
Since all of you are active players your comments would be very helpful.
Kind Regards, Peter (germanicus)
Just Say No to slowplay!
Well..maybe if you have quads.
Game #75153776 - $20/$40 Hold'em - 2001/05/15-05:25:04 (CST)
Table "Carbet" (real money) -- Seat 1 is the button
Seat 1: jame007 ($505 in chips)
Seat 2: spencerman ($322 in chips)
Seat 3: C.Corax ($1,664 in chips)
Seat 4: Guffy ($634.50 in chips)
Seat 5: robbie 1 ($1,410 in chips)
Seat 6: Richard D ($620 in chips)
Seat 7: Snowie ($247 in chips)
Seat 8: juniordog ($661 in chips)
Seat 9: jasari ($1,385 in chips)
Seat 10: @ home ($658 in chips)
spencerman: Post Small Blind ($10)
C.Corax : Post Big Blind ($20)
Dealing...
Guffy : Fold
robbie 1: Fold
Richard D: Call ($20)BAD MISTAKE
Snowie : Fold
juniordog: Fold
jasari : Fold
@ home : Fold
jame007 : Fold
spencerman: Fold
C.Corax : Check
*** FLOP *** : [ Td Th Tc ]30 MILES!
C.Corax : Check
Richard D: Bet ($20)TOO LATE TO BET NOW!
C.Corax : Call ($20)SNEAKY LITTLE DEVIL
*** TURN *** : [ Td Th Tc ] [ Ks ]
C.Corax : Check
Richard D: Bet ($40)
C.Corax : Raise ($80)
Richard D: Raise ($80)HE CAN'T HAVE A 10
C.Corax : Raise ($80)
Richard D: Call ($40)
*** RIVER *** : [ Td Th Tc Ks ] [ Qc ]
C.Corax : Bet ($40)
Richard D: Raise ($80)THERE ARE THREE TENS ON BOARD!
C.Corax : Raise ($80)"I LOVE THIS! I TRULY DO"
Richard D: Call ($40)
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $647 | Rake: $3
Board: [ Td Th Tc Ks Qc ]
jame007 didn't bet (folded)
spencerman lost $10 (folded)
C.Corax bet $320, collected $647, net +$327 (showed hand) [ 2h Ts ] (four of a kind, tens)NI HAN!
Guffy didn't bet (folded)
robbie 1 didn't bet (folded)
Richard D lost $320 (showed hand) [ Ah As ] (a full house, tens full of aces)OUCH!
Snowie didn't bet (folded)
juniordog didn't bet (folded)
jasari didn't bet (folded)
@ home didn't bet (folded)
-----------------------------------------------------
One other thing this hand shows....when Corax just smooth called Richards flop bet and then popped him on the turn, alarm bells should have went off big time. This should set off alarm bells in any players mind. It doesn't mean you have to fold..but at least listen for them! Anyways, I would like comments on this hand. There are definately arguments FOR and AGAINST the way Richard played his aces. Lets hear some! Could he have layed them down? Could he have saved some money? Is this yet another example of quads on PP? (No! wait! forget that last one!)
Some facts about this table.
It was Fairly Tightish. PLYRS/FLOP was %29 and the average pot size was $200. Both Richard and Corax were showing down quality hands before this one. Given my read on Corax, he would not have came with 10-2 if the pot was raised.
The problem is the K on the turn.
I would have backed off on the river, mainly because as I limped preflop my opponent cannot discount a ten and should have already worked out that the best he's getting is a split pot with a King - so when he keeps coming I just call fearing the worst.
Slow playing is a disease.
Slow playing aces against the blinds is just about the dumbest thing a person can do in limit poker.
Ok, there's probably worse things but this is really really bad.
Actually, in review, it looks like he limped from early position which is not as bad but still not good at all. Raise with this hand from early position.
natedogg
Joe--
This is one of the funniest posts I've read in a long time. Thank you.
Guy
Fun hand, but: there are problems with limping with aces in a typically aggressive 20-40 game but the fact of "slowplaying" isn't one of them. What if he knew that the bb had T2o. Wouldn't the 7-1 overlay justify a free flop when the alternative is a certain fold?
Chris-
You have a point. But it was an hilarious post.
BTW, are you the one who told me about Fred5114 on Paradise? If so, remind me to send you a Christmas card.
sounds like Paradise Collusion between Alger and G.D to me. This should be investigated.
been playing at true poker the last couple of days, the server has gone down at least three times. Anyone been having the same problems at the other sites?
BTW...asked the host why the crashes, his answer was barely in english....although they are very friendly, i find that usualyy the answers they give are not to the point.
While I have been playing the server was down for 5 mins.
As to the hosts I happen to like them. They seem to be pretty cool. They don't seem to give the company line, but kid with you.
Also, I wrote a post that was favorable to TruePoker here recently. The next day I received an E-mail thanking me and asking for ideas for future promotions. I have worked in B&M card rooms for over 20 years and I would like to think that the ideas that my boss's and I put into action came from us, but the truth is some customer usually comes up to us first with something similar. We then bounce the idea around and add some polish.
The B&M rooms that seem to do the best are the ones that bring the better customer's ideas into play. It gives the players a feeling that this is their card room.
It may be too early to tell , but I think TruePoker may work out.
MS Sunshine (mr)
Standard disclaimer: I do not have anything to do with TruePoker or any other poker site but if I did everyone who played 10,000 hands in a month would receive a T-shirt that says "I'm an internet poker player and yes, this chair IS attached to my butt"
True Poker, are you listening:
I think a bad beat jackpot would be great to get the gamboolers into your site.
I like the feel of the True game; I have been fooling around a bit for chump change. lol
Mark
PS I am not associated with True in any way except as a player.
I have found the tru poker staff to be devoid of any knowledge about poker in any way whatsoever. you must explain to them problems with their own game over and over again in agonizing detail and they still have no clue what your talking about. For example if you sit out a hand in the middle of a round and do not miss a blind and come back into the round before your blinds, you must post a dead $5 blind. As of yet it hasnt been fixed.
Last night underscored the importance of game selection, although I admittedly got lucky, having not seen either of the two key players before.
Paradise 2-4 Omaha-8, and I grab the lone available seat. I wait for my big blind, and I'm starting to suspect that the two players to my immediate left are trying (poorly) to collude. Turns out they were just bad - it was almost like a program:
Preflop and postflop
--------------------
* If P1 bets, P2 raises
* If P1 raises, P2 calls
* If P1 checks or folds, P2 bets
Turn and River
--------------
* Any piece of the board, any kind of a draw, one or both would stay to the end
* P2 in particular was very aggressive, often pushing top and bottom pair against a coordinated board, and complaining when someone's draw got there on the river.
I'm not kidding - a good 75% of the time, if the first condition was met, the second one came through. Despite being a relative novice at Omaha, even I recognized the potential here, given the action players and their predictable behavior. It was like having unwitting partners in the game!
Long story short, 2.5 hours, + 40 big bets.
The strategy question here for me is: In general, the rest of the table was passive, a late raise from any other position meant the nuts or close to it (ie, not tricky) Is this a valid reason to play more hands? Or how about marginal hands in good position? I was happy with the win, but I was wondering if there was andjustment to get more out of a great situation?
guys like that can make you a ton of money.....they can cost you a ton too....in the long run..they will go broke....but in the short term it is amazing how long they can last sometimes.....usually i play slightly looser pre flop....but still tite post flop
Keep track for the next 150 hrs (1 mth of full time play ) of lost bets and lost pots due to all-ins you feel are probably or undoubtably deliberate -- this would include ALL instances at Paradise where players " do not act in time " as opposed to " lost contact ". Then you can decide for yourself if I'm exagerrating when I estimate losses of approx $1000/yr for 3-6/5-10 limit.
I believe you.
OK, my cash out back in January was for around $440.
I have recieved one check in the amount of $128.
Now what?
When is pokerspot suppose to send check number 2 and 3 and possibly 4?
Does anyone remember their dates?
.... and the man with no shoes complained till he met a man with no legs.
Hi, My name is MS Sunshine, but my friends call me stumpy.
According to Mr. Boyd's "payment plan", his site was going to follow a payment schedule of paying 20% of the payout request (requests made prior to a certain date) due on the 15th of each month beginning April 15th and continuing for 6 months. That means that payment #2 was due yesterday. Since April 15th's payment did not actually go out till sometime earlier this month (due to "investigating possible collusion" of you winners) I wouldnt anticipate receiving the 2nd installment till sometime in June. For further reading consider checking the archives.
DUDE.....so far you are WAY ahead of all the DOT.COM wizards who lost it all and have NO chance of seeing dime one.
I've logged a mere 100 hours or so at one of the more popular online poker sites and don't profess to be an expert at either Hold'em or computer programs. But I have been a participant at 'real' tables for the better part of two decades, and have noticed a number of oddities about online games that just seem, well ... odd. I'm assuming virtual cardrooms have the same self-interest that Casinos have, that being that it's generally better for the host if the chips spend a good deal of time moving back and forth or round and round, rather than primarily in one direction, ie. into the stacks of the more skilled players. So IF that notion is accurate, the virtual cardrooms have a distinct advantage over their Casino competition in that they have the capability to ensure that actually happens, even though the better players should still manage to show a profit over time. But the seemingly overwhelming number of backdoor straights, flushes, set over set, quads, running pairs, etc. somehow 'feels' out of proportion. My point being, that introducing a pre-programmed tilt factor into the game, where the hands run a little 'hotter' than may otherwise be considerd normal, creating more action and bigger pots, could help significantly in attracting new customers, spreading more games, leading to more revenue etc. It would also make economic sense for new account holders to get off to a good start once they start playing in raked games, increasing the chances they'll remain steady customers. I pounded the game for the first week or so and remember thinking to myself, "I play decent enough, but I don't play THAT good" Don't interpret this as complaining since even though my results have levelled off (not surprisingly), I've done quite well playing in the lower limit games to this point. I'm also familiar with the ebb and flow, or inherent luck factor associated with limit poker, especially the lowlimit variety. But even though I'd like to believe it, I can't quite convince myself that the deck is truly random, although any bias should, in theory, affect everyone equally. Comments welcome.
MH,
I don't think you will get any comments to this post. Better luck with your next post.
MS Sunshine
I'd be very interested in hearing where you play. If it's Planet Poker or True or highlands I'd be quite surprised. Please let us know.
> If it's Planet Poker or True or highlands I'd be quite surprised
So would I, given that the overwhelming majority of online players play at Paradise.
Chris
.
This has been done to death, and not having played in full-table live rooms much at all im no expert, but I'm pretty convinced this feeling experienced live players have is to do with the much-increased speed of the game. You see a lot more of everything, but the freak events stick in the mind.
Chris
Last night I caught some great cards and I had six straights and flushes. Every single one was beaten by a flush or a full house. You can imagine that I was starting to get a little upset and suspicious. However, later, when I looked back at the hands, I saw that, apart from a few loose openings, (this was a low limit loose passive game), once the other players involved saw the flop they were "committed" to four-flushes, or top pairs, or whatever, and if I had had their hands I would have carried on with them in their seats. I felt a little better after having seen that.
"I'm assuming virtual cardrooms have the same self-interest that Casinos have, that being that it's generally better for the host if the chips spend a good deal of time moving back and forth or round and round, rather than primarily in one direction, ie. into the stacks of the more skilled players"
I disagree with this. For poker rooms to thrive they need regular players who will start the games and keep the games going. When games become too luck oriented the room won't do as well. A balance of luck and skill is required.
I will be a bit more polite than some of the others:
Paradise Poker, which is by far the largest online poker room, first posted about 5 million flop, turn and river cards, then they posted another 27 million.
Several people with decent math skills, including myself, concluded that (a) They posted the real cards which were dealt by checking our own hand histories, and (b) that these cards were random. Please check the archives for these posts.
I know a lot about computer progamming and games (my master thesis in CS is a game simulation) and I worked on some of the early well known (for their time) chess programs. I believe that the cards which Paradise deals are way more random than any real-life casino.
I also think that it is harder to program the cards to be less random: Who would you give the winners to? That's a tough problem. And listen to what Mason said, they want a stable group of winners to keep the games going.
I think you might be effected by the quick pace, the collusion, and the high level of play, much tougher than any casino at the same levels.
See some of my many posts about skills in real life vs. online. And see Ed Hill's post about collusion.
Mark
You never did demand that Paradise say who they are. This is a Wizard of Oz answer. "Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain.....". Look, these operations incorporate in Costa Rica to avoid civil litigation (owners remain anonymous), they are by all accounts owned by ex-patriate Americans. I would bet that the Neveda Gaming Commission site of banned people has at least one person with a an interest in this outfit. Here is the link:http://gaming.state.nv.us/loep_main.htm. Isn't it amazing how many people listed here have affiliations with organized crime? Many of them are current. We aren't talking ancient history here.
I have 350h on Paradise mostly playing two tables,that means 700h considering the speed of the game it is probably 1200h real casino game. I kept records and here are the results. I observed 56 times four of a kind 8 stright flushes an 3 royal flushes. I do not have to be a math expert to see that the deals are not random and the software is dealing more good hands
OK, here's food for thought for the math geeks among us. Please let me know if I made any stupid math errors.
The probability of the board pairing is:
1 - (48/51)(44/50)(40/49)(36/48) = 0.493
Now, given that the board is paired, what is the probability that one of our players is dealt the same pair in the pocket?
Assume 9 players. Call the paired card 'x' (yeah, the board could pair twice - I'm just shooting for a rough floor on the probability of seeing quads in a given hand). The probability that both of the other 'x-es' are among the 18 cards dealt to the players is:
C(45,16)/C(47,18) = 0.1415
The probability that one player gets both of these 'x-es' given that the two 'x-es' are among the 18 hole cards is 1/17 = 0.0588 (deal the first x to some player first, then deal out the other 17 cards; the probability that that player gets the other 'x' is 1/17).
Thus, the probability that the board pairs and some player has that same pair in the pocket is:
P(board has a pair) * P(the other two of that pair are among the players) * P(one player gets both of those cards given that both are among the players' hole cards) = 0.493 * 0.1415 * 0.588 = 0.0041035.
Therefore, if everyone played their hole pairs all the time, you'd expect to see quads at least 0.4% of the time, and that's not even counting the times you see trips on the board. Now, not everyone plays their pocket twos (unless you're playing the $1-2 tables), but even in the higher limits, I'd wager that all the big pairs get played and at least a third of the little ones. Some pairs get folded on the flop that would have turned into quads runner-runner. Say these two factors (folded pairs pre-flop and on the flop) knock out 60% of these 0.4% we expect to see, that still leaves us around 0.16% of the hands.
You have 700 hours; call that 40K hands. 0.16% of 40K is 64 quads, not even counting the times the board hits trips. Maybe my 60% number is too low for missed out quads - maybe it should be 75%, which would give us 40 quads. Regardless, the 56 you counted (and thank you for the data) helps settle any nagging doubts I might have had after hearing people yap about 'Paradise quads' - it's decent, though not incontrovertible, evidence that Paradise isn't generating quads at an unfair pace.
For those that read this out of sheer boredom, please forgive the math and the length.
I notice quite a few fallacies in your assumptions. The fact that youy assume the the n Sounds like "Fuzzy Math" as the current occupant of the Whitehouse would argue. It seems to me that 33% above expected value in a small distribution would account for more than 1 standard deviation. This would equate to clear problems. Of course, "Fuzzy Math" experts don't like to talk simple inferential statistics.
Not sure what you're talking about, but I'll take a whack. Your post has other hallmarks of the current White House resident aside from citing 'Fuzzy Math' - you don't take the time to elucidate what is fuzzy about it. Where are the fallacies in the assumptions? What assumptions would you make?
I had to stretch the assumptions just to get the math to come out as low as his number of 56 hands. If anything, the expected number of quads is above 56 rather than below (but then, the recorder probably missed a few - I would guess he saw in the mid-60s somewhere).
Further, care to calculate the standard deviation to support your claim?
You have clinged to a number (my computation of 40 quads as the absolute lowest possible expected value) as the actual expected value - that, sir, is fuzzy math; i.e. just clutching on to the one number which supports your thesis. Play with the numbers yourself a bit, you'll see that the reasonable range for quads is say 40-80 or so. Last I noted, 56 was comfortably between those.
If you really want to decry my original post, please do so with facts rather than 'Fuzzy Math' whining. W is hardly the man to emulate when trying to have a rational discussion.
Bubastis - Good work. So many people are willing to rely on perception when it is well known that perception is very unreliable. You have presented a sound mathematical argument for the validity of the numbers.
I wouldn't even respond to J.P's post. It's illogical, incongruous, rambling nonsense.
Just to throw out another number. How about the odds that the first 4 board cards are the same. Yes, quads on board on the turn. Very easy calculation...
3/51 * 2/50 * 1/49 = .000048
That means you would expect to see quads on board on the turn approximately every 21,000 hands that go that far. If all hands progressed beyond the flop then our friend with 40k hands could even expect to see this.
Since when is it nonsense to request the variance and SD for a simple distribution? You are the garbled mind, sir. You are the weakest link Goodbye.
Since when is it nonsense to request the variance and SD for a simple distribution?
It's not. However, the original post was filled with specific numbers, calculations and inferences. The reply was vague and only mentioned something about 33% beyond expectation. It was unclear where the number originated from.
By the way the "Weakest Link" reference is very funny. I was wondering how long it would be before that showed up in a post. I never would have guessed that I would be the weakest link. How embarrassing!
Excellent response! W. certainly isn't rational. Nor were the counters of votes in Florida. They were corrupt, hired Republican brownshirts that threatened officials lives in Palm Beach County, and caused screaming and hositility in Dade County. The S.D. , however, should be your only variable to use to analyze this data. You didn't do it. So I must lower my statement to, Good Response!
Standard deviation is not the whole story - you do need the mean. The standard deviation is around 10 (not computed exactly because we can't really know the precise probability of quads showing up - this depends on the probabilities of folks playing their pocket pairs). The mean is more interesting. We can only determine a range for the mean. If that range were 150-250, then our standard deviation would tell us that Paradise is dealing way too few quads. If it were 10-30, it would tell us too many are being dealt. Without knowing the mean, knowing that the deviation is around 10 is useless.
I think under reasonable estimations, the range is more likely 60-100 (including Maurice's quads on the board and also trips on the board with my original computation). This, combined with the standard deviation of around 10, suggests that Paradise may be dealing too few quads based on bob's observation. I think the more likely explanation is that bob missed a few while recording his data.
Hi,
any opinions/experience of ultimatepoker? Does it have many players, particularly at the 'microlimits'?
Thanks.
Black Ace
.
You online poker sites can take an obvious step to help those that wish to play the game straight up:
Offer private and public tables
If these sites just add this feature in, players can get together with players that they have met and/or trust and gather in a private game. This can be implemented by passwording the tables. This will keep the colluders in the public forum and offer an option to those "skeptical" players.
This addresses the "bot" theory also. If 9 of your friends are playing at the same table with you, there is no way a "bot" can make money since you will KNOW if any strange players sit down.
This will not hurt you financially since the rake will still be made. The only difference is the online cheater or "bot" (which I do not believe in) will not be as profitable.
There wouldn't be too much effort in the development area either. Just add a password line into the table joining section of the code. As for server load with a lot of games being created, you will just need to add an additional server to handle the requests and seperate it from the public games. You can also issue requirements criteria to create a game. For example, you will need at least 7 players to start a private game. You will need to maintain 7 players in order to keep a private game going, etc.
Implement these changes and I guarantee you will see a few things happen:
-You will see happier players -You will see less collusion as the innocent can now flock together -You will know FOR SURE that the players who complain are full of it with the security measures in place -You will make MORE money
Comments? Opinions?
-á
They have no reason to accomadate you. They won't ever do it.
Good response.
I think this is an interesting idea. Why wouldn't the poker sites be interested in something that would improve the integrity of the games J.P. ?
Perhaps he stand to lose from a change like this? :-)
Hey Yamate,
One site already does this. Once people like it (although I doubt it really helps against collusion), other sites will follow.
Mark
Which site?
Well I see it this way: if you have 9 friends that play with you at the same table, I believe it is safe to say that there are no strangers there to worry about it.
Just my opinion...
-á
doesnt true poker offer something like this?
And how does one qualify to be one of the good guys? Play for a week, have fun/chat with some others, get invited it the "safe" spot... and whammo... no questions asked 'cause we all know each other?
Your statement is very limiting by mentioning that online poker chat clients are the ONLY way to meet people to play cards. I can think of plenty of other ways that people meet up:
-Personal friends playing a weekly "home" game -Newsgroups -Live game experiences -ICQ -AIM
I'm sure there are other ways but this should be enough to make the point clear.
Furthermore, why would you care as to one's opinion of what constitutes a trustworthy relationship? The point is, the OPTION is there. Since there is a major concern over online collusion and the "bot" theory, this option directly addresses those issues. If you have a problem with it, it seems that you do not care about protecting the integrity of the game which is what this proposed feature offers which is fine also.
-á
My point is that unless you know people in person, their integrity will always be in question.. you have NO idea whether myself or others are male/female/goodguys or badguys. and if you play in a weekly home game, why would you want to pay planet or paradise $90 to "host" a game for you? BTW, I have never, will never and will never even consider using any form of collusion etc. while playing online, but I think you are being a little naive to think that this is a way to protect against collusion
You are looking too deep into the specifc examples I have given. The topic is a move by the online poker establishment to add further options to the user who is skeptical about playing online poker...not whether it makes sense to have a "home" game online.
I agree with you that you cannot protect yourself from online collusion entirely. However, I do think it can be reduced with this feature.
-á
I would be interested in this for other reasons other then the colluding one (which is still a valid point).
I think it would be fun to play against opponents on this site or people I have met that don't live near me. You could play at a low enough level that everyone can afford, and it would be a great learning experience. You could discuss the plays and learn a lot from this IMO.
Derrick
Intering theory Yanate but my concern is that if you keep playing with these so called friends, how are you going to make any profits off them. The poker pool that you want to maintain is very limited and restricted to only people that you and your friends allow in.
Furthermore, if all these players have average to good poker skills, it will be very difficult to make money off them unless you invite more players. A comparison can be made in Las Vegas where most of the pros will make their money off tourists not other pros.(ie. a good player will make more money off bad players than a great player will off good players---thus you will have to maintain a much larger poker pool to do this, but your theory is just too limiting and restritive.)
Although the idea is not a bad one because it does discourage collusion and cheating but in the LONG RUN its not a very profitable one.
You said it yourself...you would have to bring players into the game. It's very much like running a game out of your home and keeping a good mix of players in. Indeed, it can be a tough task but no more difficult than what is already entailed in running your own game.
Thanks for bringing up this important point.
-á
One reason why online Poker Rooms will not have private rooms is that a roomful of players who know one another could be playing for $1-2 at the site but for $10-20 between themselves defeating a large part of the drop.
So you are saying that the online poker site would take a loss because of this? I don't think so but it's just my opinion.
-á
Has anyone here noticed that the quality of the games on paradise (quality meaning abundance of fish) has been great for the last month. I play micro limits but it seems like every table I am on has at least one or two TERRIBLE players. I used to have problems finding juicy games in the morning hours and during the weekdays in the evenings. Now, every table I join seems to have a live one or two. Any theories? Did Paradise just do a big ad campaign or something. I mean wow. I am not that great of a player but this is just easy money. I am also not running real hot or anything. It just seems that I get paid off on my good hands so well it more than compensates for the occasional suckouts. It is amazing the stuff people pay you off with..even when you are obviously playing super tight. Just wondering if anyone else has had the same experience. Hope it stays like this for a while. I will have enough bankroll to move up again with a little patience and just ok cards...Just let them keep running ok..thats all I ask!
Best regards,
Joe
A little while ago there was a patch where whenever I logged on the games would be pretty awful. I think it was the launch of the new tourney formats. Now things have settled down, the games seem to be back to their usual self, but I havent noticed things being better than say, two months ago. The games have always seemed pretty easy to me.
Chris
About a month or so ago Paradise ahd a major promotion and offered 10% on the cash-in or something like that. Thsi brought in a lot of bad players. The micro-limits probably get the most of it because as they lsoe money higher many of them probably move down and down instead of just cashing out and minimizing their loss.
Paul Talbot
I dont agree with this....a least not in my limit. The micro limits might be easier, but recently the 3/6 games have become a lot tighter and aggressive than it used to me (I am from the Netherlands, so play at different times). I now moved up to 5/10 games because the games have become looser than the 3/6 games! Can you explain this to me? Yesterday when I played, there were 3 3/6 games; one with 18% (!!!) seeing the flop and the other two between 20-25%.
I think it has to do something with the tourney times, because when there are no tourneys the games are generally looser. I just hate the extended tourney times!
Regards, ME
I love the extended tourney times. The ten and twenty dollar tourneys are sooooooooooooooo easy to beat. As for the ring games, I have stuck to the 1-2 and 2-4 limits. Just about every session I come up ahead 30 to 60 dollars. It's a very easy game to beat. I have a couple of losing sessions but very few. If you don't mind winning a little bit at a time, stick to the low limits
This too shall pass.....
Watch out for when you start to run cold. It will be a bitch.
natedogg
Funny you should mention this, because I've noticed in the past couple days that the 3-6 games have been incredible. I played in two games this morning that brought back memories of the 4-8 in Albuquerque, and I never thought I'd see a game that loose ever again.
Guess it must be that I play at European times then, because the games seemed to have turned a bit worse IMO.
Are they still operating? I can't get any of my links to work, including the on one this site.
I've tried to register a few times, but their registration page is not working!
Dear Turtle,
My name is Victoria Pierce and I am the casino manager at CherryPoker.com. Unfortunately we have had a few problems with the registration page but they are now resolved. You are more than welcome to come back and try us out.
Best regards,
Victoria Pierce Casino Manager //CherryPoker
How often do you flop top set full and lose? How often do you win a pot with 25 big bets in it? The ups and downs are amazing.
Hanging in there... :)
Hand #1
$1/$2 Hold'em -
Table "Marakei" (real money) -- Seat 5 is the button
Seat 1: player 1 ($65.75 in chips)
Seat 2: player 2 ($91.25 in chips)
Seat 3: player 3 ($106.75 in chips)
Seat 4: player 4 ($95.50 in chips)
Seat 5: natedogg ($131 in chips)
Seat 6: player 6 ($86.50 in chips)
Seat 7: player 7 ($86.75 in chips)
Seat 8: player 8 ($35.50 in chips)
Seat 9: player 9 ($81.75 in chips)
player 6 : Post Small Blind ($0.50)
player 7 : Post Big Blind ($1)
Dealing...
Dealt to natedogg [ 9d ]
Dealt to natedogg [ 9c ]
player 8: Fold
player 9 : Fold
player 1 : Call ($1)
player 2 : Fold
player 3: Fold
player 4 : Fold
natedogg: Raise ($2)
player 6 : Fold
player 7 : Call ($1)
player 1 : Call ($1)
*** FLOP *** : [ 7d 7s 9s ]
player 7 : Check
player 1 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($1)
player 7 : Call ($1)
player 1 : Call ($1)
*** TURN *** : [ 7d 7s 9s ] [ Jc ]
player 7 : Check
player 1 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($2)
player 7 : Raise ($4)
player 1 : Fold
natedogg: Raise ($4)
player 7 : Raise ($4)
natedogg: Call ($2)
*** RIVER *** : [ 7d 7s 9s Jc ] [ 7h ]
player 7 : Bet ($2)
natedogg: Raise ($4)
player 7 : Raise ($4)
natedogg: Call ($2)
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $36.50 | Rake: $1
Board: [ 7d 7s 9s Jc 7h ]
player 1 lost $3 (folded)
player 2 didn't bet (folded)
player 3 didn't bet (folded)
player 4 didn't bet (folded)
natedogg lost $17 (showed hand)
[ 9d 9c ] (a full house, nines full of sevens)
player 6 lost $0.50 (folded)
player 7 bet $17, collected $36.50, net +$19.50 (showed hand)
[ 7c Js ] (four of a kind, sevens)
player 8 didn't bet (folded)
player 9 didn't bet (folded)
Hand #2
$1/$2 Hold'em
Table "Marakei" (real money) -- Seat 9 is the button
Seat 1: player 1 ($75.50 in chips)
Seat 2: player 2 ($95 in chips)
Seat 3: player 3 ($108.25 in chips)
Seat 4: player 4 ($97.50 in chips)
Seat 5: natedogg ($95 in chips)
Seat 6: player 6 ($89.75 in chips)
Seat 7: player 7 ($97 in chips)
Seat 8: player 8 ($43.50 in chips)
Seat 9: player 9 ($81.75 in chips)
Seat 10: player 10 ($25 in chips)
player 1 : Post Small Blind ($0.50)
player 2 : Post Big Blind ($1)
Dealing...
Dealt to natedogg [ Kd ]
Dealt to natedogg [ As ]
player 3: Fold
player 4 : Fold
natedogg: Raise ($2)
player 6 : Call ($2)
player 7 : Call ($2)
player 8: Fold
player 9 : Fold
player 1 : Call ($1.50)
player 2 : Call ($1)
*** FLOP *** : [ 8h 2h Kc ]
player 1 : Check
player 2 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($1)
player 6 : Raise ($2)
player 7 : Call ($2)
player 1 : Call ($2)
player 2 : Fold
natedogg: Raise ($2)
player 6 : Call ($1)
player 7 : Call ($1)
player 1 : Call ($1)
*** TURN *** : [ 8h 2h Kc ] [ Ad ]
player 1 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($2)
player 6 : Call ($2)
player 7 : Call ($2)
player 1 : Raise ($4)
natedogg: Raise ($4)
player 6 : Call ($4)
player 7 : Call ($4)
player 1 : Call ($2)
*** RIVER *** : [ 8h 2h Kc Ad ] [ 6d ]
player 1 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($2)
player 6 : Call ($2)
player 7 : Call ($2)
player 1 : Fold
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $51 | Rake: $1
Board: [ 8h 2h Kc Ad 6d ]
player 1 lost $11 (folded)
player 2 lost $2 (folded)
player 3 didn't bet (folded)
player 4 didn't bet (folded)
natedogg bet $13, collected $51, net +$38 (showed hand)
[ Kd As ] (two pair, aces and kings)
player 6 lost $13 [ Ac Qh ] (a pair of aces)
player 7 lost $13 [ 4h Ah ] (a pair of aces)
player 8 didn't bet (folded)
player 9 didn't bet (folded)
player 10 didn't bet
natedogg
hey natedogg,
weren't you kicking butts with your ultra tight strategy beating the 5/10 games a while back ago, now you are back down to play 1/2? what's going on? ;-)
I guess you missed the update.
First of all, I quit playing 5-10 because I realized the variance was too high.
I dropped to 3-6 and lost 90% of my bankroll on a two week cold streak.
I had about $150 left and have been playing ultra-mini stakes for only the entertainment. Been playing a few $10 tourneys too.
natedogg
natedogg,
To extend your research, why don't you try another poker room?
Tom D
hey natedogg, yea, i saw your update, i was just teasing ya. ;-)
i've gone through similar cycle on paradise as you. was up big for a while then the losing streak kicks in. all the sudden i could not win a pot for many days and suffered bad beats that really takes the fun out of the game.
i'll talk about one last bad beat hand that really bugs me: $5/10, i get free play in bb with j3o, 3 limpers. board is j73r, so i've flopped two pairs. i bet out intended for 3 bets if raise. i get one caller. turn comes 2r. i bet. he raises. i call. river comes t. he bets and i call. he turns over jt for two pairs that he made on the river. hands and plays like this just drives me nuts...
i'm taking a break from the pp games and may try some other more profitable games elsewhere...
The only time I ever flopped top boat and lost was at Paradise Poker! Quads, of course. Hey, I have a great game of 3 card monty......you have a better chance with me than with your current band of thieves!
Actually, I've lost with top boat against quads THREE times in live games during the past 7 months. I play live games maybe twice a month on average. I lost with top set full in back to back sessions in December, two days in a row. Then a month later I did it in Vegas with Vince Lepore watching.
I don't believe I was getting cheated in the live games or on Paradise. I don't believe that Paradise poker runs a dishonest site. I also don't believe there are very many people who run as cold as I do on a regular basis. :)
natedogg
IMO you're the "statistical deviate" that Jim Brier sometimes talks about.
Good luck....if that means anything to you :-)
Regards, ME
"I also don't believe there are very many people who run as cold as I do on a regular basis."
I diagree. I have routinely posted 12 rounds of blinds with out a playable hand. Such fun.
I've read that people have complained about running bad after cashing out.
I just started playing online a month ago. I won 2300 in the first 3 1/2 weeks. I cashed out 1100 and suddenly my sets always get snapped off, my AK gets beaten after flopping top pair, draws never get there, etc.
Is this a real phenomenon that many others have observed?
YOUR THE BEST, HANG IN THEIR.
Some say it does, others say it doesn't. My opinion is that it's all bull, and that what you or anybody else is experiencing are the swings inherent to the game.
Also, I think that since this conspiracy thoery started getting bandied about more people are 'looking' to get smacked after a cash-out, which might account for the recent popularity of this theory.
Where did you play? I'm still looking for tales like these from sites other than Paradise. So far few (none to my memory) surface.
Yes its a real phenomenon. Basicaly about ninty percent of poker players who start of winning are long term loosers. So what typicaly happens is a looser who was running hot starts hitting a normal run of cards.
Are these posts for real? Maybe they have hot and cold buttons programmed for each player.
LOL
When will these losers learn you can't play sets or AK with top pair on the flop. I mean, you gotta lose, sooner or later, with garbage like that.
Tom D
The 18th century evangilist Jonathan Edwards may have been exaggerating when he preched that "The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect, over the fire, abhors you ...."
But He sure as hell isn't going to let you win a grand a week at low limit online.
nt
ah HA! Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. God, what a piece... and especially fitting for this wretched game.
Next time I see you get a set snapped I fully expect a quote from this work to appear in the chatbox. Make it a good one.
.
You know, I've noticed something. Players who abuse all-in protections are commonly horrible players who end up losing anyways!
Instead of berating these players for going all-in, maybe it would be best just to let them keep on doing that. Kind of like the "don't berate the players who call when they shouldn't and make their hands"? What do you think?
Please read my reply to this very subject posted Tuesday, May 15 @ 8:26AM.
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
I think we should start posting the names of players who are abusers.If the poker sites wont stop them - maybe we can warn each other on who these frequent abusers are.
I just wonder why the message by "Kill Cheats" or something like that about Paradise and the way they might deal with colluders getting caught.
I found the theory quite interesting, and I was to re read it, but now there is only one answer to it showing. Where did it go?
Check the archives.
Hello Pokerspot Players, i just want to report to you that i have received and cashed all payments due to me from Pokerspot, it is time to give this site your full support, it has mine. Paradise Poker is a criminal operation that is out to steal your money, planetpoker is using obsolete software that is not random, POKERSPOT IS THE REAL DEAL, its software is unsurpassed both in randomness and integrity. Lets make it the number #1 internet poker site, neal ross
Wow!Don't think i have ever seen such a turn around of opinion in such a short time.Two months ago we should all have instructed solictors and Mark Napolitano was the devil incarnate for having an association via pokerpages.
Congratulations on receiving your money though and i assume the law suit has been discontinued?
I hope that most of the posters and lurkers realize that you have no credibility.
Paradise Poker is a criminal operation that is out to steal your money, planetpoker is using obsolete software that is not random, POKERSPOT IS THE REAL DEAL, its software is unsurpassed both in randomness and integrity.
What is your proof that Paradise is criminal?
Describe precisely the random number generators used by Planet and Pokerspot and explain why one is proper and the other is not.
I'm happy for all the Pokerspot players that received their money. I hope the site becomes successful now. Is it necessary to badmouth the other sites? Perhaps you feel that Pokerspot will not be worthwhile unless it can steal some customers.
I too have received a check dated late April for a cashout requested Medio March. At this time cashouts were being processed as normal according to the sites various announcements. "Processed as normal", in other and more specific terms, is defined as 40 days.
Good luck to those of you who want to go on supporting this site. Those of us who want the internet gaming industry to grow into a serious business where we're not getting screwed have an obligation not to.
TT
So much for your credability Neal. I take it your meeting with Mr. Boyd went well. I hope you can sleep at night knowing your little "gung ho" speech for Pokerspot was blantantly shallow. Luring new players to that sight only to have the rake taken out to pay your cashout is reprehensible.
By the way, congrats on receiving your requested payout payment. Keep rooting for Pokerspot, others may join the site so that the rake will be used for your next payment.
I checked our bank account this morning. There was a substantial wire transfer from PokerSpot. It seems that Russ Boyd, even without the Netpro issue being resolved, is getting PokerSpot's affairs in order. I wish him success in bringing the site back to normal. It was always a pleasure to play $20-40 there.
MS Sunshine
I got my check in the mail too.
I too got a check. I'm in no mood to forgive and forget however. They still owe me quite a bit.
I still haven't made up my mind if Russ Boyd is incompetent, dishonest or just a dupe. I suspect it's a combination of 1 and 3 but that's only a guess. I haven't ruled out the idea that he's trying to buy some business by paying off all those he's stiffed at 20%.
I'm still trying to imagine the circumstances under which I'd buy in there and play again. None come to mind. Wait, no, there's one. I get all my money and fees and $20 for the insult. Then they have some promotion that's really sweet. Then maybe I'd risk another $50 on the proposition.
Hi,
I’m project manager for a new online poker game (preview at www.riverkingdom.com). I need some help in figuring out a good policy for the behavior of our application at showdown. I’ve looked at other online poker games and discovered that they all have a different approach.
Here is the problem:
Assume that 3 players made it to the showdown (A, B and C). Player A was the last to bet. B and C called.I think that the wrong behavior in this situation can favor collusion which we want to prevent as much as possible.Naturally one thinks that A has to show his cards but should there be an option? Should it be possible for player A to muck/fold his cards instead? Should B be able to muck/fold his cards?
Since all of you are active players your comments would be very helpful.
Kind Regards, Peter (germanicus)
I see no reason to give Player A the option to muck his cards. I'd be very angry if the table window popped up as i was clicking something else and i happened to click muck cards with a winning hand.
Chris
I agree with Chris, dont give player A the option to muck. Especially if you're going to allow people playing at two tables, you could very well accidently press the wrong button. And as you stated, it's also important to recognize collusion.
One advice I want to give: plz make your interface simple and fast (like Paradise). It's the only way to attract people who play for money, since fancy pictures will only slowdown the game and will eventually be boring after a few hundred hours of play.
Regards, ME
Hi,
I am the project manager for www.bigbetpoker.com which currently offers pot limit holdem tournaments for play money.
My experience of real live play on low limit tables is that players rarely understand the showdown rules and often end up in a ridiculous standoffs which delays the game and irritates other players.
When we designed bigbetpoker we took the opportunity to allow the computer to assist in resolving the showdown problem while at the same time following the traditional rules. Thus the rules we follow are:
1) Hand of the last person to bet or raise is exposed. (If all players check the first checkers hand is exposed.) 2) The winners hand is exposed.
This will automatically muck losers hands without delay, which is probably good play, and complies with the existing rules. We have several afficionados playing regularly on the site and have not yet received any complaints about this aspect of play. Indeed, I believe players appreciate any facilities that keep play moving with a good rhythm.
Hope this helps
Dave Holdsworth bigbetpoker.com
Rather than do this, it should be:
(1) Expose hand of last person to bet/raise
(2) Moving in a clockwise direction, expose a hand if it is better than/equal to a previously exposed hand. Otherwise muck it.
Otherwise, a player in between the bettor and winner gets a chance to win the pot without having to expose his cards to the other players.
Chris
Showing all hands has some minimal collusion deterrent effect. Always giving the player a choice slows the game down. Personally the way I prefer is to make all possibilities allowable, and configurable via options.
Doesn't need:
* Graphics of players seated around a table, or other unnecessary pictures. * Complicated sound effects or animation, if they slow the game down. * Anything else that decreases the speed or clarity of the play.
Needs:
* Option to play two tables at once * A clear and open top-down view interface * A clear picture, at a glance, of how much each player is betting and how much is in the pot
The only problems with the Paradise interface are:
* Sometimes when trying to click an action on one table, the other pops up and you click an action there instead. I don't know how you would fix that.
* The table pops up a bit too much. When you post a blind it pops up not only when you get dealt the hand, but also as soon as someone calls.
* It needs a "if anyone bets this round, fold" action button. Say you're in the BB and you check the flop. You then have to wait for someone to bet before you can click Fold. Clicking the "fold" checkbox auto-folds your hand on the next round, which isn't what you want.
Chris
I agree with you to a certain point.
Me myself are not a professional poker player, I gamble because I like the game. Simple as that. The stunning graphics found on for instance True Poker (compared to other non-understandable or non-designed interfaces) I found very nice, entertaining and gave my games a little bit more feeling of a "community" than a regular paradise-lookalike table.
Of course I can see your point in having a small view, if you only play professional and want the game to be as slick as possible, sure, but not for me.
I agree on the rest of your points, but not the one about the user interface, where I beleive a nicer interface calls for less frustation about details :-)
Cheers! Albert Sandberg
I’ve been listening to a lot of discussions about the user interface of online poker games. As I see it there is a clear line between recreational players and professionals. Both have different needs and wishes.
Professionals want all the things Chris mentioned in his message and a lot more (suggestions are welcome ;-). Pros often play instinctively and know what to expect from a computer based poker game. Usability engineers call them expert users. Generally they have their main focus on flexibility and speed. I think this description works well for the majority of the contributors here.
Recreational players are very different. They don’t know enough about the game to make conscious use of auto-actions. This is way to advanced for most of them. Usability engineers call them end users. They often need guidance and want as few options as possible. They are clearly in it for the fun of playing.
The way I understand it the professionals are fishing for the recreational players. That’s the way to make a living out of poker (correct me if I’m wrong). Recreational players are trying to learn the game and one part in learning is playing against better players.
Chris, I understand your opinion (and others) about game speed and efficiency and I agree with you from the expert player's point of view. However graphics and sound effects don’t have to slow down game speed. It’s just a matter of doing it right. That means that effects and actual game play should be separated so that game play does not depend on animation speed or the length of sound effects.
My point is that the poker community needs different poker game clients connected to the same server. That means that expert users could use an extremely efficient and highly configurable user interface whilst end users could use an interface which gives more guidance and doesn’t stress them to much. I imagine that this solution gives both user types what they want and the possibility to meet at a table at the same time.
Kind Regards,
peter (germanicus)
Excelent Idea. I whole-heartedly agree that a two-client solution is best, and that a highly configurable client is a good alternative. I like being able to turn off the animations on paradise, but i hate that damn window popping up all the time. I think it should remain in the background unless you click on it. A flashing taskbar button would indicate where an action is needed, as well as a sound effect. It would be very interesting if the client allowed you to program a first two cards AI that could act for you in pre-determined ways, at least before the flop.
Thank you for your input. I'll put your suggestions on my list.
/peter
If you are intent on playing two tables simultaneously. try this........
Get an 2nd video card for your puter, or one of the newer video cards that allows you to hook up 2 similar sized monitors at the same time.
That way, you can have both tables up at the same time and your mouse easily travels from one monitor to the other.
if the " second table " is popping up and blocking out the first table it's because you have your screen resolution set much too low. You should never run 2 games at resolutions below 1024x768 on a 15" monitor. Set at 1600x1200 on a 19" monitor I can run 4 tables at once (ie 2 Paradise,1 highlands,1 Planet) with no overlap whatsoever. Pay a little more attention and you'll notice that " check/fold " buttons are provided at all sites.
Hi all,
Thank you for your feedback. Your comments confirmed my own thoughts and I will give game speed an extra thought.
Kind Regards,
Peter (germanicus)
Show player A's hand down. If B can't beat it his hand is automatically mucked if he's checked the 'muck losing hands' box which you have so thoughtfully provided. If B's hand wins it is automatically shown, and the same procedure is followed for C's hand, etc. etc. This whole process should take about three seconds.
It was wise to ask the poker playing community to offer suggestions for your software. Good thinking. I personally favor showing down all hands simultaneously, and highlighting the winning hand. Also, textually calling the winning hand would be a good idea, just to make clear how a loser got beat (for the newer players who might not see it): "Aces and Jacks with a King"
From this morning's New York Times:
In a sharp reversal, several of Las Vegas's most powerful casinos no longer want to ban Internet gambling, and some are starting Web sites and exploring technology that could eventually offer wagering in homes, offices or anywhere there is a computer wired into cyberspace. ... In the last Congress, legislation intended to halt Internet gambling passed the Senate and fell just short in the House. But the bill's Senate sponsor, Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, said that because of the casino industry's reversal and the power of its lobby, the window to pass such a law "may have closed."
Already, members of Congress from Nevada who supported the bills just months ago are suggesting that their positions have changed, echoing the sentiments of an industry that pours millions of dollars into campaign coffers. ... Senator Kyl said the industry "has a ton of money, and money is what killed us last time."
This is a fairly long article that I encourage interested people to read. There's also speculation about the casinos trying to muscle out the current operators, and the prospect of regulation based on age-verification technology and global positioning systems that would allow the government to determine whether someone is gambling in a legal jurisdiction.
Always love to see the government make decisions based on who gives the most money. Bunch a weasels.
Pisses me off even when a decision supports something I want.
http://www.vegascorner.com/news/article_listing.cfm/1073
The casinos can jump onboard – and win - or they can attempt to artificially control the marketplace – and lose. It looks like they’ve come to their senses. And if we can hold the would-be social engineers at bay, perhaps legal internet poker will spread to the more progressive states.
I just read this article in the NY Times online:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/17/technology/17GAMB.html
If you don't subscribe online it is free and only takes a few minutes to sign up. It seems the Vegas casinos are now reversing their longheld position of banning internet gambling...now they are totally embracing it. I am not sure what kind of effect this will have on online poker, but I thought everyone might be interested.
Best, Jason
anyone got any good ones??
like eg its imoral to let a sucker keep his money
one of my favorites.
Sincerely, sucker
On playing heads-up against a superior opponent:
"When you starve with a tiger, the tiger starves last".
Actually, I can't say for sure that's a poker quote. But it's fitting and I like it.
"When tiger leaves mountain, monkey is king."
if money lasts, luck will come.. Jim
"No spade, no spade, no spade, no spade... Argh!"
Sincerly, Andreas
"In the poker game of life, women are the rake".
"Worm" (Ed Norton) to "Michael McDermit" (Matt Damon) in "Rounders".
Michael: "I never heard of that saying".
Worm: "Well, then there ought to be one"!
n/t
nobody knows where the hobo goes when it snows
Surgeons in Britain amputated the hand of the world's first hand transplant patient because the guy requested it, after his body rejected it. How depressing is that? It's bad enough getting rejected by women, but guys, when your own hand turns you down?
In an interview with Vanity Fair magazine, Hugh Hefner admitted having 7 girlfriends, one for each night of the week ... Someone should tell him those are called nurses.
He said they all have sex together in the same bed and Viagra makes it possible ... I think money makes it possible.
LeAnn Rimes apologized to fans for the quality of her new album. Isn't that unbelievable? If LeAnn Rimes has to apologize for her album, what the heck is Kathie Lee going to do, commit suicide?
Fashion experts say that President Bush is helping bring back cowboy boots and cowboy hats. So they're not just for male strippers anymore.
"Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people." - W. C. Fields (1890 - 1946)
"The gambling known as business looks with austere disfavor upon the business known as gambling." - Ambrose Bierce (1842 - 1914), "The Devil's Dictionary"
gh
"But why..... i have THREE pairs! " A friend who played Hold'em for the first time, in a home game with me and a couple of other friends, asked why i took the pot down when he held Q2 against my AQ with the board reading Q J x J 2 (despite the fact that we explained that you only play with 5 of the 7 cards, and the concept of a kicker to him, he actually showed down three pairs a few times more that night...)
"If an Ace and a King hadn't come on the flop, my JJ would have held up."
It was SUITED!!!
In an Omaha 8 hi\low game, quote by a fish who showed down a winner with 9992.
Good luck,
TC
My favorite is when someone says to you when your AA has just got cracked "If you hadn't raised, I'd have seen the flop and made a straight"
How about:
"I am a winner at Paradise"
I´ve come to the conclusion that there is alot of intermediate players on for ex paradise. we all get our fair share of ups and downs and there inbetween we make a few different moves, some better som worse and evetually we will get a bit ahead, together with paradise, winning some from the worse players that probably doesnt read this forum. Now to the point. Ive noticed that being an averege player myself, I still have enormous fluctuasions and sad to say that some of it probably comes from more than once playing below my potentiality.
I kind of know the theory, but still do a few moves that I know has negative expectation in the longrun, and why? I guess some of it comes from knowing that I have a slight edge over the averege,some from the fact that im a longrunwinner(can always get it back) and some from getting bored-dreaming away,etc. Now if I would to examine all my hand histories I´d probably find out that it is not these plays that have built my bankroll for sure. As a matter of fact these are the plays that slows the growth. on the other hand, one gets to play more. Sitting there waiting for the correct combination of Cards-Position-Opposition etc can really put one on a semi-tilt.
My theory is that it is this kind of semi tilting that also the intermidiate players do that creates the really big waters for the ultra succecfull players, those who have their game under near total control. Under other circomstances they would only be a slight bit better than perhaps you and me the average player, but the semitilt might be what makes the difference.(i´m not even gonna tuch the subject of totaltilting since there´s just nothing more to say about it than:Forbidden) On the other hand it gives positive expectation to another intermidate player who can handle this, because now his field of potential "wrongmakers" has grown to not only consist of the so called fish, but now also includes many intermediate winners on the site.
Conclusion. Play your best game all the time- One is never excused to, for example put in that extra call, when one knows its a bad play in the long run. just stop it. (said and done lol) background: Ive played on paradise since feb-2000 total + 12 500$ excuse my english if u dont like it please reply in swedish lol
Reading Pokerspot comments and opinions is sometimes tedious. But, it does seem important for all of us to keep updated and, if possible, more accurately informed. We need more facts and less vitriol.
To that end, I am posting immediately below my cashout request date, amount, and its disposition without any further comment. I invite other similar posts. If enough posters relate the details of their situation, we all can have a more accurate picture of the current overall situation. (My point is that many posters say they have been paid recently, but we (I) don't know how many remain unpaid).
NOT old winnings...new winnings after returning to Pokerspot in response to Russ Boyd's e-mail request of Mar 17.
Requested just after Russ Boyds statement (March 17. was it). Check issued 40 days later. Received Medio May. What worries me is that checks at the time of the cashout, were being "processed as normal" according to pokerspot propaganda.
TT
Owed $14,000 (so $16,800 with the +20%) from cashouts in Janurary, under the structured scheme should have received payments on April 15th, and May 15th
Owed $6000 from April 2nd
Yet to see a single cent
stuart, my "debt" situation is very similar to yours both with old cashouts and new cashouts. The last communication I received from them was two weeks ago. Have you received any communications from them recently? The last reason given to me for the delay was a fraud investigation to evaluate if some players were dumping moneys into their accounts using fraudulent credit cards. But now a three-day investigation has turned into two weeks.
Thanks, puravida
Sent you a mail, but in brief no I haven't heard anything further from them!
This is disturbing. It lends some weight to my theory that Russ Boyd might be salting the mine with some small partial cashouts hoping to generate enough business to keep going while failing to pay off the big creditors. I suspect he's rationing his cash but there's a lot to the picture that I'll probably never know.
Finally got a $40 bank draft for my $200 jan cashout last week. Still havn't seen my $300 from late March.
I have heard of a bunch of checks coming in over the last two weeks. Mine was $5000, a few days ago. There are several of the 57 large cash outs that I have talk with that have not recieved theirs yet. I feel your pain. Hopefully it will get resolved soon for everyone. Yes, I still play there. So, shoot me, but I like the players and the software. I'm running well there and I can't give that up. There are about 15-20 players that have run their bankrolls up to a decent level and are waiting for the Netpro thing to work it's self out. Till then I think we'll get small checks every 4-6 weeks. I know we were promised fixed dates, but we are starting to get paid.
MS Sunshine
I don't want to suggest that you might have dishonest intention in sticking with pokerspot, but it stands to reason that if you are to have a chance of getting the money owed you (cashouts made before March 15) you would need pokerspot to see some playrs buying in in participating in games with a rake (not merely in tournaments).
Oh by the way: My bank draft seem to have cleared with flying colours.
TT
I'm still owed about $350
I got my first installment payment ($400 of $2,000) for my January 2001 cashout. It was due on April 15th and I received the bank draft on May 1 to my home. I'm currently waiting for my second installment which was May 15th. I'll post here when/if that comes to me.
Last night, in a period of less than six hours, the single stud table at Spirit Mountain had three bad beat jackpots hit for $10k, $10k, $6800. The qualifier is only AAAKK but each time the hands made were quads over quads. That's six quads in six hours at one table, which beats anything I've seen online.
One of the players had been there for all three - getting the big end the first time. Another player got one big end and one small end.
Nick,
It's not impossible that something funny was going on. There are people who go after these jackpot games. They hold out, and cut the dealer in.
Tome D
My record on Paradise is 7 Quads in 1.5 hours, and I personally had 3 of them.
If Paradise had a bad beat jackpot I'd be retired by now.
In the interest of fairness after making a post "Truepoker SUCKS!" I have to make it known that Truepoker dealt with my problem fairly and quickly.
They told me a check would drafted on Monday and this morning I recieved it. If this is normal (I it is according to their site) cash-outs can be expected in a matter of days. I thought this is something people would like to know.
For those who did not see my original post, I had a problem accessing live-money tables after buying in. At the time I was pissed because I was excited to take advantage of their $50 for 100-hands offer and couldn't do so. I also thought I lost my 5% cashing back out. Truepoker contacted me even though I sent an email to the wrong address (a truepoker account but not the customer service one) and refunded my 5% fees.
Though pissed originally I have since been impressed with their handling of the situation.
Just thought I should post a follow up since my original post was so negative.
Paul Talbot
Sat in an online game today with a full table of conspiracy theorists who all claimed to be "good" players with years of poker experience and thousands of hours of winning play in casinos and card rooms. They were all sure they were being ripped off on the rake, could never make their big hands hold up, and other players could see their cards, ect. ect. Never mind that nobody at the table was cleaning up (hard to do at 1-2 anyway). They all complained that they have never had a bad run of cards like this, it had to be a fix. I had quite an opportunity to closely watch these "winnning" players,(due to my own dry spell of cards which I don't blame on the dealer or the house) and not at all to my surprise these are the hands I found the experts playing: raise MP A-2o; call 2 bets cold 6-5o; call EP 10-2s (i'm not kidding, I wrote them down); raise EP Q-To; call 3bets cold on turn with 4 flush on board and the J in hand; here's a goodie from the flip side; floped a full house (A5 hand, flop A5A), call preflop, check/call flop, check/call turn, call river, win pot, doh!! I won't bore you with more examples but the point is THESE GUYS SUCK!! They're not getting screwed, they're screwing themselves with their own bad play and then trying to find a scapegoat. Please guys, don't quit because you think it's all rigged, I haven't beaten you "experts" out of enough money yet.
Excellent post. It's a hilarious truth about poker that many winning players have HUGE holes in their game. I honestly don't doubt that many of these "experts" you mention actually ARE winning players in live play.
I cannot tell you how many winning players I've met and/or know well who make absolutely awful plays like the ones you described in your post. I think the number of players out there who run good and win despite playing badly is far higher than any of us would like to think.
I once played with a fellow who was running a little cold and he couldn't believe it! He was astounded that he'd gone three rounds without winning a pot. And this next part is the most amazing thing I've ever heard at a poker table, which says a lot. He said "Aren't you supposed to win about two pots per round on average? I normally win two pots per round. I've been playing for FIVE years and I've never run this cold."
Three rounds without a pot. Whoop-de-frickin'-doo.
natedogg
Maybe they are on tilt because their cards are being exposed...
-á
You mean to tell me that every self proclaimed good player plays like that? Baloney. The gerrymandering and hucksterism by the online poker promoters here is astounding. Every post by you guys is how easy it is to win at Paradise and how everyone there is soooooo bad that you can win by just showing up. You shout down and try to discredit everyone (and there have been many) who tries to question why they get pounded online while being winning players in live games. You stack this forum just like I think the online games are stacked. Team up and get em. I can’t believe that the hosts let this go on. Flame away.
If you are routinely calling raises with QTo and T2s, you are not a winning player. Period. If you are making crying calls on the river with flopped fulls you are also not a winner. If you are playing 1-2 you are probably not a winner, although I won't go so far as to say that you definitely aren't.
I am encouraging everyone who plays online and claims 'the games can't be beat' to re-evaluate their play and try to find the leaks. Are you just running bad? Maybe. But, more likely, you are limping early with suited A's, seeing the turn with an A4s on the button when the flop comes AKT and there's a bet and three callers to you, slowplaying on a K 9 6 flop when you have KQ against four other players, etc. etc.
If you're just sure the games are rigged than you may want to start participating on a different forum, as this mule has been whipped to death on this site and I think most of us are sick of listening to it. If you have compelling evidence to suggest that the games are not honest-- and by compelling I do NOT mean 'I had three sets snapped in an hour last night in my .50-1 game"- than by all means share it. Otherwise leave the subject alone.
Shout down again. You get acerbic enough and you'll have this forum to yourself, which is what you prefer. If I don't agree with you and your blatant promotion for your own self interest, I can take a walk? Pathetic. Personally, I'm sick of the "I don't know where they come from" type posts that are pure advertisements posing as legit reports. This forum has turned into one Paradise ad after another.
"If I don't agree with you and your blatant promotion for your own self interest, I can take a walk?"
No. However, if you have nothing to contribute to this forum other than crude anecdotal evidence that suggests these games are dishonest, than you should be aware that you are contributing nothing new to this forum, as others have preceeded you in this capacity.
Which "crude anecdotal evidence" are you referring to?
I am referring to your posts of a few weeks prior, in which you declared that you were done with online poker because your big hands were getting snapped too often. You then went on to insinuate that the games were likely crooked, and used as evidence the fact that your big hands didn't seem to be holding up.
If you think online poker is crooked, that's fine. In fact, I won't sit here and say that the games are 'certainly' on the level, since I can't say for sure either. However, since almost anything can and will happen in the span of a few hundred hours at the poker table, I think it's hasty to assume that the games are dishonest simply because you have hit a bad turn.
I’m sorry, I don’t remember ever stating that I was “ done with online poker because your big hands were getting snapped too often”. Please tell me which date/thread you are referring to. I can't imagine me being so shallow!
I believe that I started the thread where I proposed a plausible system for collusion that was inexpensive to implement and provided a substantial statistical advantage over other players. Some discussion ensued where others (I don’t remember you responding) suggested that my proposal had flaws. I tried to pose corrections to those flaws as any businessman would when coming into a problem potentially affecting the bottom line.
I further proposed that if it is that easy, why couldn’t you expect a certain percentage of the 2,000 odd players on Paradise to be colluding when the advantage was so high and the risk was so low. I further suggested that the large swings that Paradise players experience when “running bad” could be easily explained by such collusion and it being “your turn in the box”, so to speak. It was (I think) and intelligent theory that stimulated some interesting discussion. Did you read any of that thread or did you just confuse me with some other anti-internet poker whiner?
Chip Breaker-
It's possible I confused you for another poster, in which case I'm sorry for wasting your time.
Like you, I think collusion is certainly possible online, and I'd go as far as to say that I suspect it does occur, which is one of the reasons why I won't play higher than 3-6 (Ed's thread scared me, and I doubt that anybody engaging in collusion would bother with limits this low, although I readily admit I could be wrong here). My personal results at the 3-6 limit, however, are right about where I would think they'd be, so I don't get the impression I'm being whipsawed by other players.
Again, let me re-iterate: I have zero quarrel with posters who intelligently outline arguments in which the honesty of online games is brought into question. It's a situation which could certainly arise (or already be occuring), and we, as online players, should be receptive to voices which have something rational to say on the matter. That said, I've run out of time with posters who insist on whining about their online beats, then subsequently masquarade as 'fact finders', on par with Woodward and Bernstien, who have uncovered some devious truth about the integrity of the games in question (note: I am not putting you in this catagory).
If one genuinely believes that the games are rigged, then one shouldn't play in them. However, until one has COMPELLING EVIDENCE to suggest that the games are foul, please refrain from posting on these forums, as you are contribuing ZERO to the understanding of the online poker phenomenon. We, as participants on this forum, don't need any more gonzo quad theories, or hare-brained posts on unevenly distributed flops (where the 'evidence', as such, has been culled from 100 hand histories), or how 'the big draws never seem to come in', ad nauseum.
As I said, I'm not classifying you in this group. But they do post liberally on this forum, and I'm tired of sorting through it. Hell, I've taken some of the most savage beats imaginable online. I've flopped sets of A's in 8 way capped pots, only to have to chop the pot seven ways... I've been quad undered, straight flushed, and lost to uncountable two and three outers... But I've also given my share of beats too, which goes along way towards tempering my suspicions about the games we're talking about.
Further auguring my distain towards these kinds of posters is the fact that just about every player in 6-12 and lower is a lifetime loser at the game. They may not 'know' it, since they've deluded themselves into thinking they're big winners, but when I see guys flipping over J7s's on the river UTG I have a pretty good idea what their hourly rates are, and believe me--playing online is not the problem. God himself couldn't turn these people into winners. If you're losing online, there's a chance you've been cheated, but it's more likely that you just play bad. Therefore, spend more time asking yourself why you feel compulsed to call with A8s's in the SB when it's three bets to you, and less time clogging up this forum.
And thanks, Chip Breaker, for helping me make this a civil discussion. I look forward to exchanging ideas with you in the future.
GD wrote:
If you are making crying calls on the river with flopped fulls you are also not a winner. If you are playing 1-2 you are probably not a winner, although I won't go so far as to say that you definitely aren't.
----
I find it hard to imagine how you can make a crying call with a full house. There aren't many circumstances under which I would fold a full. And saying that if you play 1/2 you aren't a winner is just stupid. I'm a winner, but I play 1/2, simply because I don't have much money. Any increase in my bankroll beyond what I need to play gets cashed out and spent, not used to move up limits. (I live in Australia, where the currency is pretty weak against the greenback at the moment, so 1/2 is actually more like 2/4 anyway). Being a winner in 1/2 is exactly the same as being a winner in every other game: you just have to be better than the other players.
Chris Anti-Paradise-Is-Rigged crusader since 1999.
Awesome point!!
-á
my remarks re: a flopped full were in response to the original message in this thread.
And you should re-read my post. I said that if you are playing 1-2, you are probably not a lifetime winner at the game; not that you are certainly not.
GD
You wrote, “If you're just sure the games are rigged than you may want to start participating on a different forum, as this mule has been whipped to death on this site and I think most of us are sick of listening to it.”
Who started this thread, Mr. This-mule-has-been-whipped-to-death? And, why are you, and a few others, the first to respond when someone questions Paradise's integrity?
You wrote, “Otherwise leave the subject alone.”
Could you list the subjects the rest of us are allowed to discuss?
Tom D
Look--
I don't make the rules, so you can discuss anything you want. If you're confused by this, you can e-mail Mason Malmuth personally-- he is the moderater of this forum-- and he will assure you that if you choose to start threads in which you declare that the online poker games are dishonest you are certainly welcome to do so.
What I'm tired of-- and I'm sure I'm not the only one- are the posters who loudly insist that the games are crooked despite having no empiricle evidence to corroborate their claim. Having had 'three sets of A's snapped in two hours, all your draws busted, and a pair of pocket Q's snapped by a T4s on the river' is NOT in any way 'proof' that the game is rigged. Those who have intelligently suggested that the games may be dishonest-- Ed Hill comes to mind here, alhtough there have been others-- are an asset to this forum, IMO, as this is a subject that needs to be addressed. But it needs to be addressed in a rational fashion. When a poster puts forth nothing but anectodal evidence, then screams from the rooftops that 'the games have to be crooked' because 'they've never run this bad before', that poster is contributing nothing new to the discussion of online poker.
Which is O.K. Not every post has to be illuminating. But I, for one, get sick of wading through all that crap in the effort to find intelligent and articulate posts, and as a participant on this forum I think I have every right to express my frustration with these kinds of threads.
Whoa, "hucksterism". Haven't heard that once since I read my last Doug Grant post.
You look very foolish to the people here who are beating the game. Not only am I one of them, but I personally know, at a quick count, 6 others.
Chris
6 others??? Hahahahahahaha
Yes. I'm one of them, I know the other guys all personally. We all win. We are good at poker. You probably aren't. I've been beating the game at paradise for nearly a year now. The swings are massive but we learn to deal. Maybe you should take up chess. You'll still lose but at least it won't cost you money.
You don't know whether I'm a winning player or not. Please provide hand histories to prove that I'm a losing player.
Actually in the higher limit hold'em games there were some truly excellent players when I was playing. They are not so easy to beat;-)
All the players on Paradise Poker are crappy and it is easy pickings. Paradise players gang up and take everyones bankroll the cheating is rampant. Like everything in life neither of these extremes is a truth. The reality lies somewhere in the middle it would be impossible to say that there arent some extremely week players online. Futhermore, one could not say that cheating does not occur. However, it is important to realize that the limits that you play especially in Texas Hold Em can greatly dictate the number of players that will see a flop and catch a draw with rags. Just look at the % befor the flop the lower the limit the higher is the percentage as a general rule. Some of these guy even play J-4 unsuited. Are these cards being played in the 10/20 rooms? Very unlikely so you cant be shocked when they catch a draw. In the lower limits they could be holding anything. You must adjust your played based upon this assumption.
The fact is that I have met-- by which I mean played against and spoken with-- exactly three players in my life who I'm absolutely sure are winning players, and I've probably "met" somewhere around 3-500 hold 'em players in my day. It's not an easy game to beat, and the overwhelming majority are incapable of doing so.
Further, if any of these three players felt there was something improper about the game they were playing in they would leave without hesitation and never come back. They would NOT bitch about "Getting a flopped flush snapped", speculate openly about the honesty of the game, and then continue to play.
Hence, my suspicion is like yours. These players are longtime losers who are frustrated by the game. But, since nobody in a casino wants to listen to them whine for three hours they vent their anger into the chatboxes, to an audience that while perhaps not sympathetic is at least not openly distainful.
Good post. I play in local homegame here in Norway where we are just a bunch of friends who for most are all playing pretty good poker (I know this based on what I've read and learned).
Personally I have beaten the game for about $2,000 in about four-and-a-half month averaging about 25 hours a week, so the hourly rate in terms of dollars ain't excactly impressive, but I've made this money mainly on $.5/1 through $2-4 and $10 and $20 tournaments. Sure I've had my tilts at heads-up tables and ring games even as high as $20-40 (though not excactly blowing a whole bankroll at that limit!), but these jumps have cost me money rather than working as a 'quickie'. By now I think I've overcome the paranoid 'potential-tilter' period (at least most of it), and I'm confident and calm just playing my good game at $2-4. I hope to someday have built up a proper bankroll for $5-10 as the games there are almost as juicy as $2-4 in terms of big bets, and as anyone would, I want those big bets to be $10 instead of $4. :-)
What even more solid proof for Paradise is how my friends have fared.
One has had several 3 days-3 weeks long runs winning $2,000-$4,000 but playing way above his bankroll at times and being extremely prone to tilting. Having cashed out these huge amounts only once or twice, he's just about break-even. He doesn't think the game is rigged, but realises that he has a serious problem with tilting.
Another of my friends have recently been grinding it out at $5/10 and $10/20 (when the games look fairly weak), making good money, but not anything like 'fantasy', just the very realistic 1 to 2 big bets an hour after consistent, 3-4 hour long afternoon sessions.
One other player more prone to semi-tilting, not the 'moving-up-the-limits' kind, but just playing bad, and generally even when not on a tilt playing below the "solid player" level ran poorly to begin with at Paradise. He claimed the games were rigged. I think it's very possible that this player could run like this without the games being rigged. He didn't stop, of course, and recently got a bit of quickie at the $10/20, and is now also a Paradise winner and believe the games are good. Oh well.
Then the winning player in our homegame. The one who has been catching 2, 3 and 4-outers on the river like there's no tomorrow in the short year we've have been playing (and we haven't played that many nights either, so according to what I've read, the sample is still small enough for him to be a big winner when he in reality is a losing player or a marginal winner). He has not been running well at Paradise. He may be slightly up, but nowhere near most the others. He, of course, claims the games are rigged.
As a last note, I would like to say that for me, it would rather seem that Paradise is the real deal and that my local home game is rigged. I have always been 'one step' ahead there, reading the litterature and more importantly playing according to it. Of course this ain't so. But that's my point. While some claims to be winner in their card-room and casinos and are angered by running bad at Paradise, others are actually experiencing the opposite. Perfectly natural, at least until the sample is FAR, FAR bigger.
lars
I live in Australia and personally have met 13 other people who have at one stage or another played Paradise. Of these:
- 5 have won quite a lot of money in the long term. The player who has been playing longest has won about $US 10,000. These players have played games at limits ranging from 2-4 to 5-10, and the occasional adventure up to higher limits. One of them won $3,500 in his first month, then experienced a big downswing and now has a much saner win rate. One of the others lost his first two buyins and quit the game in disgust for a few months, but has now won thousands.
- 1 of the others also experienced a massive win rate in his first month or two, but has since lost a lot and is currently about even, maybe a bit ahead, and doesnt play anymore.
- 1 of the others never moves above 1/2 and has probably won about $100 over months of play. He plays recrationally.
- 5 of them are losing players so far. 3 of those don't play anymore - poker doesnt interest them enough.
Finally there's me and the other two. We all play 1/2 and 2/4 generally and have all won between $US 1,000 and $3,500. Our current win rate is probably about 3 BB/hr at 1/2 on two tables - fairly conservatively. (One of us keeps records and recorded a win rate of 6 1/2 big bets an hour over about 200 hours of play. Im also doing better than that at the moment, but it's been a pretty good couple of months).
None of the above players think the game is rigged, nor have they ever. Both of the players who experienced huge upswings thought at the time that they were much better players than they were. The person who lost both his first two buyins thought for a while that Hold'em was a bit of a stupid game, with not much advantage for good play. Things even out in the long term. Play well and you will win.
Chris
Its funny that the fundamental question to answer, which is who owns Paradise Poker, has never been answered or adressed. Apparently people that feel that online gaming should be regulated, which would enable players to play with confidence, is not even a matter for consideration. Reasonable people that ask these questions are labled conspiracy theorists. I suppose the same unreasonable defenders of an anonymous industry that borders on organized crime believe that the securities and exchange acts of 1933 and 1934 were created by conspiracy theorists, too.
I don't think anybody's saying that we, as poker players, don't have the right to know who owns Paradise Poker. All we are saying-- or, at least, all that I am saying-- is that those individuals who insist that the games must be crooked because they haven't been able to beat them should probably closely examine their own games for leaks before blaming their results on cheating, bum software, etc. etc.
Also, to date I know of know evidence other than that of the anecdotal variety that suggests these games are less than honest. If I'm misinformed on this point please advise.
You are not misinformed. There just hasn't been any real data. The millions of boards do not qualify as complete data, and any inferences are poor. You are correct that players should look to their own games first. The industry would do better to be regulated. Self regulation could begin with full disclosure of ownership. Until that happens, I would assume that the owners have something to hide.
Interesting argument from an anonymous poster: failure to disclose identity gives rise to an inference of "something to hide."
well...touche....maybe I do have something to hide.......still....how can any legitimate person argue against regulation? I'm not hiding behind purported players names while making outlandish statements in support of the site. Illegitimate people have plenty of arguments against regulation.
I am a fairly good player, not great. I do go on tilt, but overall I am a winning player. That being said I have this question. Is it possible for a good player to call 2 bets cold from someone who is either UTG or 2nd to act with (A,3o) or something like (k, 7o). I ask this because I have been playing poker for 20 years and I do go on tilt, but have never considered calling 2 bets with hands like that. I see people do it all the time who I consider to be ok players. My point is that if you call 2 bets cold with a,3o or k,7o you cant be a good player, tilt or no tilt. Calling with these hands suited I feel is also insane! For example when I am on tilt I may call 2 bet cold with something like 9-10, but I fell that I have a lot better shot than with the hands mentioned earlier. Am I way off base here? Have any of you good players out there, on tilt or not, called 2 bets cold out of position with a hand like A 3 off?
Thank you
It is never right. I suspect some people do it thinking that the UTG raiser has a big pair and if an A hits they could wina big pot. It's horible thinking and they will lose a lot of money doing it. Most of them aren't thinkign past, "hey I have an Ace!"
When you see this type of action you can immediately put the person into your poor player category.
I was just wondering what everyone thinks about the tourneys at paradise. In particular I would like peoples' opinion on which buy-in amounts represent the best mixture of prize money and quality of players. I have been building my bankroll since starting in the $5 and now mainly play $30 and $50 events. What bankroll size would you recommend to play exclusively $100's? Am I correct when i say that most of the players in the tourneys seeem rather poor? I would very much value any opinions and advice regarding these matters, thankyou. PS what is a good win rate in these events?
You're playing at the right level. I wouldn't go any higher. (Collusion) The 30-dollar level is great. These players are weak in general. I've played to date 103. (I'll give you specifics if you email me) I have $1800 just to play 30-dollar limit.
Hey Martin,
If you've kept records, you can calculate a reccomended BR using your past results.
For example, for a 5$ tourney, with a $1 entry fee, your possible results are -1.2 units, +.8 units, 1.8, and 3.8 units for not placing, 3rd,2nd, and 1st. So, to get a win rate, add up all your finishes, and devide by the # of tourneys.
To calculate variance, for each result, it is (result - winrate)^2, again in units. Average all of these and then you have your Variance.
Next decide on a risk level. If you feel risky, and the money can be replenished, a formula for needed units (buy ins) could be 1.5 * Var/win rate. If you are more conservative, you should use somehting closer to Mason's formula of 2.25 * var/win rate.
Finally, devide your cash on hand by this number, and voila, this is your reccomended limit.
For example, I'm teaching my girlfriend to play online, and while I discourage it, she loves the tourneys. Her winrate is .15 units, and variance is 3.24 units^2. So our BR formula is 1.5 * 3.24/.15 = 32 units. Since we've got about $300 in the account, this means she plays $10 tourneys.
On a final note, notice that the rake is %20 of the buy in for the $5, and only 10% for the larger ones. So if you're close, you should play up a notch, as the extra .1 goes right into your win rate.
Best of Luck,
Zooey
P.S. as an extra fun math fact, you may want to ask yourself if you've played in enough to have meaningful results. I.E. How accurate is your win rate prediction? You can calculate your uncertainty as the sqare root of your variance devided by number of games: (var/games)^1/3. we've played in 84 tourneys, and so our uncertainty = (3.24/84)^.5 = .19. Notice that this number is bigger than our win rate! So we could be winning at a rate of .34, or barely losing. Bottom line, it takes a long time to caluclate an accurate win rate, and by then the game conditions or your skill level have most likely changed. I think this is the central irony of Bankroll management.
The exponent in my p.s. should be 1/2, not 1/3:
P.S. as an extra fun math fact, you may want to ask yourself if you've played in enough to have meaningful results. I.E. How accurate is your win rate prediction? You can calculate your uncertainty as the sqare root of your variance devided by number of games: (var/games)^_1/2_.
How do you get to play for free in PP.? I have downloaded the program but I don't see where to click to practice with play money.
On the main window (lobby) Click on the Lobby menu, in the upper left hand corner. On of the options is "Hide Play Money Tables." If this is checked, uncheck it by clicking, and voila, the play money tables should appear below the regular ones.
Good luck and have fun!
Zooey
I do not recommend playing at the free tables unless you are just trying to get a feel for playing online. You will not learn to play HE well at the free tables.
My wife is learning to play so I started her out on the free tables.
The play is truly stupid. No one has a real stake so everyone plays with reckless abandon.
If you need to play free you are better off using Wilson's software.
Good luck
5/10 HoldEm at Paradise Poker
I have 67offsuit in the Big Blind. All fold to the SB who smooth calls with Ace four offsuit.
The flop is Ace eight duece. Rainbow. Check Check
The turn is a four. check check (my opponent is slowpaying Aces and fours). Presumably he is trying to checkraise.
The river is a harmless looking five (giving our hero the nut straight).
He bets out. I make the first raise. He makes the second raise and of course I cap it.
Next time you hear about the bad beats of Paradise . . .
If I don't laugh I'll cry
This is the type of beat you can't let bother you if you are going to be successful at PP (which I am). I try to think of it as some perverted form of winners tax. After all, there has to been a reason for the fish to keep coming back.
All fold to the SB who smooth calls. I raise in the BB with a pair of fours. BTW we are playing 5/10 HE. I like to raise since it gives me respect regardless of the flop.
The flop is 4, 7, King rainbow. Check Bet Call
The turn is a Jack (completing the rainbow). Check Bet Call
The river is a ten. Check Bet Raise Call
If you think my worthy adversary had AQ you would be very wrong. He played 89 (offsuit).
God, I love this game. I feel better already.
I enjoy short-handed play, and I've been quite successful at it. So I was really happy when I opened an account at Planet Poker not long ago to discover their 5-player max games. But there is a problem. They rake $1 at 20 and another at 40. If you look at the math for this in a game like 5-10, it's just too much.
To be conservative, say you win 1 out of 8 pots. Say there are 100 hands per hour. Say the rake averages $1.50 per pot. So you win 12.5 pots per hour. 12.5*1.5=18.75. So you have to earn $18.75 per hour just to break even in this game! Again, I tried to make those all conservative estimates.
This is in line with what I have observed about the 5-10 5 player games (a little less observation of the 10-20 games, but assume somewhat more rake as most pots get raked the max, and tougher games as the limit is higher...). My experience suggests they are beatable when they are super soft with little preflop raising and players who are not too tenacious or aggressive postflop. But they are rarely this soft, and when they're not you're not going to make up that $18.75. Presumably the 20-40 is somewhat beatable. But these are ridiculous rakes at limits below that. I hope players who would like to play short handed online will urge Planet to cut the rake in half. That would at least approach being fair to the players.
I believe the rake for hold 'em in the major Las Vegas cardrooms is dropped to $1 per hand when it is five handed.
I sugges that if you are unhappy with the rake then you should not play.
????
I sugges that if you are unhappy with the rake then you should not play.
That's it? Can you be a bit more succinct?
I believe that Mason is talking about free market principles and an individuals right to shop around.
PLAYER,ive seen you play, your the best dont worry about a few dollars.
I don't know what you're trying to say, but you haven't seen me play. I don't play under this name. Maybe someone else does. Anyway, unless the rake is lowered I doubt I'll be playing much on Planet. But I would like to see it lowered since I do like the idea of the 5-player games.
Why is the rake a function of the number of players and not the amount in the pot? Also, isn't the number of hands more important than the rake per hour?
If they take out $2 at $40 in the pot, why does it matter if there were 5 players at the table or 10 players at the table?
I am obviously missing something here.
The rake is a function of both the size of the pot and the number of players in the game. The problem is that it is not reduced enough, as the number of players decreases. The way rakes are typically structured, in full games (say, 10 handed), they reach their cap extremey easily. So they will still reach it quite a bit of the time in a short handed game. (For example, how hard is it for a pot to get to $40 in a 5 handed 5-10 game? Not very.) But in such a game you will of course win a lot more pots, and therefore pay a lot more rake. Also, a lot of those pots will be smaller than those you win in a full game (but not small enough to avoid capping the rake). So it needs to be lowered quite a bit as the number of players decreases.
Thank you
So if the rake was an absolute constant with no cap, then it would not matter how many players were in the game?
It would matter. Say there was a $2 rake every hand no matter what. Consider a 3 handed game. Assume you win 1 of 3 pots. Assume 120 hands per hour. That means you'd be paying $2 rake on 40 hands per hour, or $80/hour in rake. Obviously such a rake would be beyond ludicrous, and the game would be totally unplayable. But if the game were 10 handed, and you won 1 of 10 pots, and there were 50 hands per hour you'd just pay $2 rake on 5 hands per hour, or $10 per hour in rake. Still high at lower limits, but clearly more reasonable. So, unless management just decides, "Hell with the games being beatable. We've got plenty of suckers who will pay crazy rakes" (which is close to what goes on with lower limits in brick and morter rooms as well as on the net), rake must be adjusted adequately downward as the game gets shorter handed.
Sorry, I was confusing.
Constant rate, not an absolute constant amount.
For example, 5 cents for every dollar bet.
Therefore, you would pay the rake more short handed but the rake would be less.
Certainly, at a constant absolute amount the rate would kill you short handed.
Okay, I see what you're saying. I don't really know how well that would work. It's easy enough to do the math for a given limit, estimating average pot size etc. Maybe one could come up with a reasonable percentage that way for a given limit. But I think you'd have to lower the percentage as you go up the limits. Otherwise you'd get some huge rakes. I'm not sure, but I sense there may be some problem as well with the large rake it would mean for big pots. Also, I think short handed pots may typically be bigger in proportion to the number of players involved. So the rake there might hurt more. I'm sure there are other issues to consider.
Though an easily enough analyzed question, I don't have the time to tinker with it right now. Maybe someone else would like to think it through more thoroughly. Note too that a good existing alternative to the typical methods of rake is a reasonable time charge.
Their rakes are outrageous. I suggest, through chat, you urge the other players in the short games to email a protest to Planet and to include the assurance they won't continue to play.
Does a virtual poker room really need to rake almost as much as a brick & mortar to make a good profit? With all the various poker sites perhaps competition will eventually lead to a lower raked game. But not unless we walk away from the high rake games as Mason suggests.
Hello all,
Let's say you are playing in a 2-4 through 5-10 online game which is very soft. Like Paradise was in its early days, or when they run a promotion, or like some of the other newer sites can be. For instance, 60% of the players are taking the flop. 1-2 of them see every flop. 3-5 see 60% of the flops. 2-3 others are good, maybe, but not great, but much tighter. The 1-2 really weak players can have anything; while they will lose enough to be stopping soon, you never know what they might have. The 3-5 seeing 60% will lose more slowly...but not always, depending on the luck of the cards. Also, a difference between the really live ones and the semi-live ones is that the live ones will stay for pre-flop raises. The semi-live ones will fold unless they have something decent. Oh, and you (the 2+2) reader, might be one of 2-3 players who will ever raise pre-flop.
Playing very tight may be the way to win, but other strategy changes are in order too. I'll give an example thought:
From Medium Stakes, Jim Brier: Do you raise under the gun with AQo? Jim says yes. David S. says that raising will drive out bad players who will play any A and any Q. Good reason to just call. But then, will one of the semi-fish (with Q2s) or total fish with Q2o pick up a 2 to beat you? I think I raise: When 5-6 will play, it is hard to beat all the outs they have....and a raise will drive out some of the semi-fish.
Ok, what about these: K2s, Q9s, 22? Do you play them? Remember, almost no one raises. When they get two pair, they often have no idea that you got the flush or the set...or are these too vulnerable to getting beaten.
In fact, here are more general questions:
1. Do you loosen, tighten or stay the same (when you are playing 25% in a 'normal' game)? If loosen, which hands do you add? If tighten (like Lee Jones says), how tight? Or would you stay the same?
2. What about levels of agressiveness? If some of the players will stay with anything, how long do you bet AK which misses -- which in a more 'normal' game will take down the pot, but which is vulnerable here to someone with J3o when a 3 hits the river? Do you play more, less or the same agressive?
OK, this 'great' game is beatable, but is it more, less or the same beatable as you would expect?
Mark
From Medium Stakes, Jim Brier: Do you raise under the gun with AQo? Jim says yes. David S. says that raising will drive out bad players who will play any A and any Q. Good reason to just call. But then, will one of the semi-fish (with Q2s) or total fish with Q2o pick up a 2 to beat you? I think I raise: When 5-6 will play, it is hard to beat all the outs they have....and a raise will drive out some of the semi-fish
---
Being afraid that A6o will make two pair and beat AQ isn't a reason to raise. I've always raised UTG with AQ, but lately I've been giving thought to just limping. It's not just to do with what hands stay in and what hands fold, its also the way the hand plays out after the flop.
---
Ok, what about these: K2s, Q9s, 22? Do you play them? Remember, almost no one raises. When they get two pair, they often have no idea that you got the flush or the set...or are these too vulnerable to getting beaten.
---
No, no and yes, but I don't see a lot wrong with playing KXs if you're careful. I play AXs quite a lot, but I think it's easier to figure out if you're beaten when the flop comes Axx rather than Kxx.
---
1. Do you loosen, tighten or stay the same (when you are playing 25% in a 'normal' game)? If loosen, which hands do you add? If tighten (like Lee Jones says), how tight? Or would you stay the same?
---
In a loose passive game I will limp low pairs UTG and play AXs in all kinds of crazy positions. In a loose aggressive game, I'll tend to stay tight in early position and only loosen up late. Or leave my seat and go find a loose passive game.
---
2. What about levels of agressiveness? If some of the players will stay with anything, how long do you bet AK which misses -- which in a more 'normal' game will take down the pot, but which is vulnerable here to someone with J3o when a 3 hits the river? Do you play more, less or the same agressive?
---
I dump AK and similar hands early multiway and play them aggressively against 1 or 2 opponents, usually betting again on the turn if the board isn't scary. On the looser games on Paradise you need to be careful of people taking a card off on the flop, they will usually do this with virtually any two.
Chris
If you are playing 25% of your hands in a normal game you are going to go broke.
I am curious about the game at Paradise Ive played thousands of hours in casino games. I am seeing peculiar situations, To me there are way to many nut hands or close to best being outdrawn, mine and other players, I watch the game very closely, and I might add I have been extremely succesful in long run applying Mr. Sklansky`s strategys in casino games. I have shown no expectation in several hundred hrs of mostly decent games at Paradise, I know what they claim but I have to say I have become concerned.Am I playing bad, rarely, I play near perfect position as well as adjusted my hand selections to game conditions, I also have considered rake to game conditions, I should be showing expectation.I feel something is wrong, especially that I had accumulated 400 hrs in casino previous, I swear on my life, Ive been cracked steadly sure Ive payed the odd guy off when I shoudnt have, in retrospect, I play pretty solid, my teacher Mr. Sklansky is one of the BEST, my records prove it, but lately Ive seen something extraordinary, as far as continuously being cracked on turn or river, or just plain missing flops by alight year, with the few hundred hours of casino play, no cheating, combined with the paradise hrs, I swear its like a jinx, I know luck is a minor detail in my game, it is based solely on correct play. I was under impression by listening to claimed pro`s that this is impossible, but IT IS not.iT HAS HAPPENED TO ME , I am really puzzled as well as for first time, almost scared to play. The worst swing I`ve ever had is down foe about three hundred hrs, this is a long one. Do you have any advice? to tell me Im just playing really bad I will not even consider, as I stated, Ive been using Davids strategy for 4 yrs, and have never even dreamed this could possibly happen. Thankyou
"Do you have any advice?"
Stop playing at Paradise. It's just that simple.
Don't bother posting similar threads here again, you'll be labled a whiney loser with many holes in your game, and by the way, don't forget that Paradise is faster and...
Why not ask your teacher these questions.Ask him if you should continue playing at Paradise or for that matter any online site.There are far too many posters on this site who are either going to say you play bad or not as good as you think,or they will say paradise is rigged or you are playing against too many colluders or the shuffling isnt random etc.Until these questions are answered by someone who is well respected,famous,poker icon -we will discuss these issues till the cows come home.
The previous two posters pretty much nailed it. This thing has been beaten to death - its corpse revived - and beaten to death again.
However, that doesn't really help you.
I don't know if the game is rigged or cheating goes on, or if the cards are not random.
However, I do know that I have 1500 hours of play at Paradise and I am well positive. Therefore, I can conclude the game must be beatable.
I am only playing low limit 3-6, 2-4 at Paradise where I play 6-12 or 8-16 live. The players are light years better online than they are at my local casino (canterbury).
Good luck
dk,
You wrote, "The players are light years better online than they are at my local casino (canterbury)."
If this is true, then Canterbury must be a magical place. From what I've seen, playing and watching at Paradise, the players are far worse than they are where I play (Atlantic City).
W Mckenzie, above, is concerned about the suck-outs he is seeing at Paradise. Can you see why your saying "The players are light years better online...", is incongruent with W Mckenzie's seeing so many suck-outs?
Tom D
He appeared to be making a logical argument:
A) I am a winning player live B) I am losing online
Conclusion: Something is possibly not kosher online.
It appears his assumption is that the players online are equal or worse than the live players he faces.
I am simply saying that is not neccessarily the case. I am only addressing a very narrow aspect of his post and not his post in general.
It is quite possible something is wrong with online play - e.g., too many suckouts. However, I am not addressing this possibility.
W,
I assume you are new to this forum. There have been many before you who have posted identical concerns about Paradise, and the evidence is very compelling that something is "peculiar", as you say.
The following is an interesting post by Wake up CALL:
Posted By: Wake up CALL Date: Monday, 26 February 2001, at 6:07 p.m. In Response To: Although interestingly (DaveMcG) "Finally i think it is time for me to step out of the dark as a former paradise employee & programmer. They deal cards randomly on average. The thing is we were asked to write code to slightly change the dealing for the shorter distribution of time to make more close situation amongst the players whilst keeping the long term average keeping up. This is why there are apearing more quads versus full houses and the like than seems to be normal in the short run. However, this is as i understood from a colleague writer being changed in one of their latest revisions, to be less noticable. Secondly, I do not know if the project has been finished at paradise but we were building code for sensing the hands being played by the new accounts and compare them to a index of profitable starting hands. If the account plays indexed to be tight it will give out more good starting hands with bad flop types to favor the gamblers to extract maximum rake. I have left Paradise for several other bad experience of the management overthere. You dont want to meet this guys in a dark alley."
Might this explain what you have been seeing?
Tom D
Well, if Paradise poker is accustomed to hiring Mongoloid imbeciles like the poster of this message, there is no way they will have the brainpower to write the code to do this effectively.
This post is clearly a hoax.
Pro,
How do you know the poster is from Mongolia?
You wrote, "This post is clearly a hoax."
Can you explain why you think it is a hoax?
Tom D
You wrote, "This post is clearly a hoax."
Can you explain why you think it is a hoax?
The post isn't clearly anything. It is just as likely to be genuine as it is to be written by a 14 year old kid while masturbating. It contains no specific information that makes you say "this must be genuine". It also contains no ridiculous information that makes you say "this is definitely a hoax".
In my opinion, posting information like that is worthless. If you want to discuss possibilities, fine. If you are going to claim inside knowledge without the ability to back it up, what's the point?
Genuine or not, it pretty fairly describes the type of hands that fall at Paradise on a consistant basis. Programming a computer allows endless variation and controls. It would be hard to not tweak things. If need meets opportunity, even honest people are tempted to steal.
Wow. I remember that post. It does have an ominous and believable tone to it. If it is the case that the owners behind these poker sites are skewing the shuffle, should that come as a major shock to anybody? People seem to assume there is some natural law or a universal enforcement body that operates to ensure such a thing does not happen.
A couple things we have to ask ourselves if poker site operators are modifying the deals to alter outcomes:
* Is it illegal? What policing agency is going to declare it so, since these sites are offshore and multi-jurisdictional?
* Is it unethical or even wrong? By what authority is the alteration of the shuffle declared inappropriate? Unlike Chess, there is no universally accepted set of rules for poker, no 'book of Doyle'. Where is the absolute law written that states the shuffle must be random? If the shuffles are altered to facilitate action and profit, is it possible it is done in the belief that it is ok? - perhaps with the justification that since every player goes through the same cycle of slanted deals over time, it is equitable. I would not approve but can imagine the poker site owners may feel it is within their right to do so.
Nick,
You ask some excellent questions. Coincidentally, my brother and I were talking about Paradise yesterday, and he asked the same questions you're asking. It's somewhat comical to think that even if one could determine who has jurisdiction and present undeniable evidence
!!
Nick,
You ask some excellent questions. Coincidentally, my brother and I were talking about Paradise yesterday, and he asked the same questions you're asking. It's somewhat comical to think that even if one could determine who has jurisdiction and present undeniable evidence that the deals are manipulated, the judge could say, "So what?"
Tom D
we were building code for sensing the hands being played by the new accounts and compare them to a index of profitable starting hands. If the account plays indexed to be tight it will give out more good starting hands with bad flop types to favor the gamblers to extract maximum rake.
This may be why you so called winners at Paradise are actually winning. You think you are good players, but if you sit down at an honest live game, you'd get killed. You would be classified as loose calling stations. Must be nice to be able to play bad poker or possibly adjust your game to play bad poker and be successful. No wonder you defend Paradises honor so staunchly. It's the only place you can win.
I just can't leave this topic alone. If there is reason to suspect Paradise is not straight then a prudent player (like myself) should simply avoid them. The plain truth is we will probably never know if the game is honest and there's absolutely no way to prove the honesty of Paradise's game. The one thing that strikes me as most telling is the near total lack of similar charges against any other online poker site. Granted, the lion's share is Paradise but there is still quite a large number of players at others sites and they're not squawking.
It's also quite possible that Paradise's industry dominance is due in large part to the flotation given to pigeon players.
In my responses I make my case against "online poker" not just Paradise. I try refer to Paradise in direct response to a Pardise comment. It is possible to collude on any online poker sight with complete undectability. It is just easier on Paradise where there are so many games being played.
You've only played in live poker games for 400 hours?
Playing live games for 400 hours, and then winning and calling yourself a winning player, is like playing roulette for a while and declaring yourself a winning roulette player.
There is nothing fishy about the paradise poker games from my perspective. And I have a lot more experience in live games than you do. These games are ridiculously easy to beat and are a great source of extra cash.
My guess is that you don't play well enough to beat the games.
The above post is, in my opinion, the truth. I am not a disgruntled player - I am slightly ahead overall at the lower limits and I have put in my time.
The description of the software/dealing behavior is very accurate as to what I have observed while playing there.
I think this can be best observed in the Heads-Up games where the length of time two players go at it directly influences the amount of the rake received, although I think it exists in all games there.
Observe some of the 1-on-1 games for extended periods of time and I think you will begin to believe that this poster was, indeed, a former employee with insights into the software development at PP.
Does anyone know his/her email?
Comments??
Observe some of the 1-on-1 games for extended periods of time and I think you will begin to believe that this poster was, indeed, a former employee with insights into the software development at PP.
Does anyone know his/her email?
Comments??
Couldn't you, or anyone else who thinks they have noticed such patterns, written a post like that? The fact that the post describes patterns that you feel exist does in no way imply that the poster is who he claims to be.
I have started playing the Omaha H/L tournies at Paradise. I have no trouble at all making the final 4 players, and can usually make the final 3, through playing tight aggresive, drawing to the nuts.
I have trouble at the end however, and unlike holdem, where making the top 3 usually means first place, i find it difficult to make the movement from 3rd or 4th into 1st. Does anyone have any similar experiences, or advice for playing Omaha8 short handed?
Hello Pokerspot Players, most of you know that i have been both the biggest supporter and detractor of Pokerspot throughout the past 6 months. First, i still play there and play more hours than anyone else. Second to those of you who are owed money, it should be obvious to all that the Spot is making its best effort to pay everyone and keep the site open. They still have cash flow problems and this will not improve dramatically until the level of action picks up. If you want to be assured of getting paid you will have to get your respective computers away from Paradise (where you will definitely lose anyway) and get back to Pokerspot and start playing. You know who you are, some of the prominent names who i have not seen recently include but are not limited to; bikerbrat, puravida, holdemdude, adessa, 72o, merlin, razzo and others. Pokerspot has inarugably the very best software, the site will only survive if players play there. I hope you naysayers out there get the message, neal ross.
So we give them money (rake) of our own, so they can then return it to us? Hmmmmm Im not an economics wiz, but that doesn't add up to me...
Neal, could you please support Paradise Poker and bad mouth PokerSpot, for awhile. This may help us more in getting players back to PokerSpot.
MS Sunshine (mr)
Neal, I believe Pokerspot has good intentions; however, they have still yet to prove to me that they are doing everything to pay their players and to treat everyone fairly. I have yet to receive a dime. I did receive credits to my credit card for the deposits I made in late March, However, I am still due a payment for the old debt and am still owed my cashout for earnings made after March 15th. Pokerspot is paying some of its players as has been indicated, but there are others who have still not been paid. What is the process in determining which players are paid and which are not? Why do the small winners get paid and the big winners nothing. I believe they have good intentions but they are not managing the process very professionally in my opinion. In addition no communications are being made. I also am afraid that the deposits made since March 15th are being used to pay off the old debt rather than the current cashouts. Of course I have no proof of this but without any communication from PokerSpot who knows what is going on. Even a small payment would go a long ways to restoring some credibility. Russ Boyd needs to come straight with his debtors and make a reasonable plan out of this mess.
In any case, I still do play there every now and then to support the site as I have a vested interest in their success.
Puravida
Anyone who deposits new money into pokerspot right now, under these circunstances is a (see below)
!!!!!!!!!! HORSES ASS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHERE IS ALL THE MONEY, SOMEONE IS COMMITING FRAUD!!!!
ANSWER ME THIS QUESTION
1. Why cant what happened to pokerspot happen to another poker site, even paradise. Please answer this question, because I am afraid that the answer is it can. Pokerspot had the money taken from them, if my understanding is correct. Or it was FROZEN! When your money is in a foreign country anything can happen. Your money is safe until it is not. Watch the movie Blow and you will know what I mean.
Any comments??
Haven't seen a cent of the money that's owed to me and I don't intend giving them a single dollars rake until some of that debt is cleared
Just wanted to throw in my 2 cents.
Collusion: I've been playing poker a lot of years. I used to play in a pot limit game where colluders would sometimes try to come in and run the games over.
Well, a couple of us regulars figured out how to detect collusion. It really is obvious if someone is doing it. The fact is that all of those guys went broke. All of them. They didn't know what they were doing. We smart fellow DID know what we were doing and we laid big traps for them. They would often find that they were both broke and one of us had all their money.
The point is, I can spot collusion a mile away. I have always been on the lookout for it online. I can say completely honestly that there was one time when I *suspected* that there *MIGHT* have been collusion going on in one hand. Only one time. But I have also been actively looking for the signs.
Sure there are hands where 3 people get caught in a jam. This does not mean that there is collusion. When that has happened to me, all three of us have had reasonable hands. IE set over set, flush card that pairs the board comes on the river.
Are the games beatable:
These games are very easy to beat. I do, however, find them to be DIFFERENT than live games. They take some adjusting to maximize profit. Some people can win in live games, but cannot adjust to online games, so they whine about cheating, etc. This is nonsense. These guys have to learn to adjust to maximize their profit in differing situations.
To be perfectly honest, I don't see how anyone can be a good player and not crush the games online. I am still puzzled about Ed Hill. I can't explain it, but I do know that I can beat those games consistently and that it they are not challenging.
One last thing about beating these games.
There is a simple fact that most of you don't realize, but that you will just have to accept:
Most of you who THINK that you are winning players are NOT.
David has touched on this before. Many casual players think they are winners because they remember those times they won a few hundred. Then they forget about all the other times they LOST.
95 percent of low limit players are losers. I wonder what percentage of those losers HONESTLY BELIEVE, incorrectly, that they are winners? My experience suggests probably over 1/4, and that's being conservative. And a lot more than that claim that they are winners and actually are not.
You probably are correct about winning and losing players. You might also be incorrect about unregulated gaming. Anyone that argues against regulation, even if it is self-regulation outside of the US by an internet gaming commission established by the owners of the larger sites( they would need to publsh ownership, licenses obtained in Antigua..or other Caribbean countries....financials on at least a bi-yearly basis, be open to independent audits), is a snake oil saleman.
To be perfectly honest, I don't see how anyone can be a good player and not crush the games online.
I believe you have not yet run cold online.
The games are absolutely beatable ... in theory. However, it's amazing how cold the cards can run for some people. Until you've had a 150 or 200 big bet losing streak, you simply cannot speak with authority about the games.
A losing streak like that is ROUTINE for even winning players who play online. Even in live play, you should experience swings like that from time to time, regardless of your skill level. Your bankroll needs to be huge if you want to play online consistently.
natedogg
I will say this with complete honesty:
In all the time I have been playing poker, I have certainly had losing streaks. But I have NEVER had 2 consecutive losing months. And I have never had a losing 2 month period.
I've played many thousands of hours of poker.
I've also had losing streaks online, but these losing streaks reflect the kind I've had in live games.
I've had losing weeks, but never 2 consecutive losing weeks.
I have always been extremely conservative about my bankroll, both in live games and online. I will never EVER go broke in either. I have a six figure bankroll for live games and I VERY rarely play 80-160. In fact, I won't play in any game unless it looks like there are at least a couple of soft spots. If that means I have to slum and play 9-18, so be it.
When I play online (you are going to laugh at this but it's true) I play at limits where I have 1000 BB. If I were ever to lose enough that I would have to drop down in limit, I would do just that. And I'd stay there until I had enough to play higher again.
Once per month, I have a check sent to me for exactly 5% of my bankroll. So if I run bad and lose 5000, big deal. I get 250 less that month and my bankroll is still flush. I have never actually lost that much, BTW.
My bankroll reached equilibrium about 3 months ago. IE the amount I make each month is approximately equal to 5% of my BR.
I know people who buy into the 5-10 game with 500 on their credit card every once in a while. Needless to say they all lose it. It doesn't take a mathematician to figure out why.
"I know people who buy into the 5-10 game with 500 on their credit card every once in a while. Needless to say they all lose it. It doesn't take a mathematician to figure out why."
I agree with most of what you've said, but the above is pure nonsense. To each his own, but IMO only a fool would keep a small fortune in an offshore gambling account that isn't regulated. If they went tits up tomorrow-- and who knows, stranger things have happened-- you'd be screwed and blued.
I see nothing wrong with keeping no more than 100 BB's or so in your account, then putting in more money if you hit a cold run.
You will go broke.
As for what I'll do if PP closes up shop and I lose the money in there, well, that would suck. I have 5 figures in that account. But that is a chance I am more than willing to take. And it will not effect my lifestyle since I've never seen the money anyway and I never take it into account when I assess my finances.
That's the price I choose to pay to play online. It is the only way I know to do it safely.
As for periodically making rebuys when you run bad - do you see the problem with that? You only have to make a rebuy if you lose your first buyin. That means you are losing. A winning player only has to buy in ONE time.
As for periodically making rebuys when you run bad - do you see the problem with that? You only have to make a rebuy if you lose your first buyin. That means you are losing. A winning player only has to buy in ONE time.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
God I wish I could run as good as it would take to even BEGIN to think this way.
natedogg
What you said doesn't make any sense. Say your bankroll is $3,000 for 5-1, a decent amount, but you don't want to put any more money into PP than is necessary. What's the difference between buying in for $500 and putting more money in when you get low, versus putting the whole lot in?
Chris
Obviously if you lose your money and have to buy in again, then you are a losing player.
In that light, I suppose there is no difference between buying in for 500 10 times and losing the 5000, and buying in for 5000 all at once and losing the 5000.
But there IS a difference between buying in for 500, building a stake from there, and cashing out periodically but never buying in again, and buying in for 500 several times and always losing it.
I repeat - why would a winning player ever have to make a rebuy?
Because they are a winning player but are playing above their limit for the amount of money they have online and get wiped out by a swing. The point is that the amount of money you have online doesn't have to be the same thing as your bankroll. Just like the amount of money you sit with on a live table doesn't have to be your bankroll. If a player has $100,000 in his pocket, sits $20/$40 with $1000 in chips, loses it and has to dig into his pocket for more money, is he automatically a losing player?
Chris
You don't get it.
Ok fine, go right ahead and continue the cycle of buying in, running up your chips, going broke, and starting over.
You're the one doesn't get it. I would be surprised if you're breaking the games open as much as you claim if you fail to see the distinction between bankroll and table stake. As long as you're not going all-in every 30 seconds, it doesnt make a difference.
Chris
buy-in, means amount you put on table when you enter the game--to me, that is. thus seems Chris starts 20-40 with 1,000 and pro starts with 10,000???? I have seen many many players start with 1,000 but never have seen 10,000 start. guess thats the way Pro can play on only one buy-in!!! I know many that beat the game over time, but I know none who beat the game every time!!! something fishy here.....Jim
This is in response to someone who said that why would a winning player every have to put money in their account again.
I can only give you my own personal experience on paradise. Last year between July through November I earned over $60,000 on PP and cashed all but $10,000 out. I then had a an awful run and lost the $10k in the account. So of course put money back in my account to continue playing.
So that's how a winning player deposits more than one time.
Shelly
Natedogg,
I've played a lot of hours online. I haven't kept records so I don't know exactly how many, but I guess it would be approaching 750 hours on two tables. My biggest losing streak is 100 big bets. Either I'm just really lucky not to have seen a bigger streak, or I can expect less variance at the lower limits I play (due mostly to my higher win rate), or I play a lower variance game than you do. I'm guessing it's a bit of all three. Anyway my point is that players don't need to go through some kind of baptism of fire to know what they're talking about on PP. If a player has played a lot of hours online, they can have valid opinions about the game.
Chris - Also smashing the games (1/2 though)
Chris you are absolutely right. Everyone's opinions ARE valid and I regret making the implication otherwise.
At the same time, I think it's kind of amusing to read posts from people who claim the games are as easy as 123 and that if you can't beat 'em for 7 big bets per hour you must be lying to yourself about your ability to play poker.
In fact, Pro claims he's never lost money for longer than a week and has never had two losing weeks or two losing months in a row.
If he's played as long as he claims, then I would KILL to be able to run just 10% as hot as he does.
natedogg
natedogg,
You wrote, "Your bankroll needs to be huge if you want to play online consistently."
I agree with you if you're talking about Paradise. However, it should not be that way. Because of the speed of online games, the fluctuations should be less severe, hour for hour online verses live play. And that's exactly what I see at online sites other than Paradise.
Why, since Paradise deals more hands per hour than any other site, are the fluctuations more severe instead of less severe like they should be?
Tom D
If by "less severe, hour for hour online verses live play" you mean smaller swings per hour, then that's totally incorrect. The speed at which the game is played has no bearing whatsoever on the size of swings, only the speed at which they occur. After all, you're still being dealt the same hands and making the same plays, so why would swing size change? Swing speed does change though - it becomes faster. Paradise is 3-4 times faster over two tables than a live game, so a swing that would've taken 12 hours of live play can be compressed into only 3 hours. Fluctuations occur much more quickly online. Fluctuations will also occur more quickly on Paradise playing two tables than on other sites playing one. Any difference in the actual size of swings is due to game type, not game speed. Higher win rate among other things leads to smaller variance.
Chris
ChrisVWH,
You wrote, “If by ‘less severe, hour for hour online verses live play’ you mean smaller swings per hour, then that’s totally incorrect.”
I don’t think so, and I don’t know why there is confusion. It seems intuitive, to me. The more trials, the closer the actual results will be to the expected results.
You can use dice as an example. The more rolls you can roll in an hour, the closer you will get to averaging seven per roll for that hour. And, the more times you roll, the less likely it will be that you experience a severe swing, like averaging four per roll.
Moving forward, it seems universally agreed upon that the swings at Paradise are monstrous. That may be the case, but it is not because of the high number of hands dealt per hour.
Tom D
It's true that if you sped the game up sufficiently, then swings per hour would be reduced, but you'd have to speed things up a LOT more than they are at Paradise. A bad swing at Paradise can still last in the order of weeks. Imagine a graph with time along the x axis and money losses/wins along the y axis. Imagine an arbitrary line going from (0,0) to (2,2). Now imagine you double the speed of the game so the line goes now from (0,0) to (1,2). You've doubled the slope of the line ie doubled the severity of the swing for that hour. You have to cram multiple ups and downs into one hour before swings for that hour are reduced, which isnt going to happen. I would expect swings per week or per month to be less at Paradise but not per hour, because there it is speed at which the swing is occuring, and not a larger sample space, which is the defining factor.
Hope that makes sense
Chris
ChrisVWV,
Your hopes are dashed. I can't make any sense of what you wrote.
You wrote, "It's true that if you sped the game up sufficiently, then swings per hour would be reduced, but you'd have to speed things up a LOT more than they are at Paradise."
Huh?
Your wrote, "Imagine a graph with time along the x axis and money losses/wins along the y axis. Imagine an arbitrary line going from (0,0) to (2,2). Now imagine you double the speed of the game so the line goes now from (0,0) to (1,2). You've doubled the slope of the line ie doubled the severity of the swing for that hour."
The slope of your line doesn't have anything to do with swings. It is a function of earnings over time.
You wrote, "You have to cram multiple ups and downs into one hour before swings for that hour are reduced, which isnt going to happen."
Huh?
Tom D
Just wanted to throw in my 2 cents.
It looks like to me Paradise Poker is still beatable in the long run, but the card distribution does have some problem. It is easy to be hot or very cold, some have explained that it's because of more hands per hour, but I don't think that's the only reason. Many of the players here have already posted enough about this subject, the bad beat sessions are simply too bad to be true.
btw. I am winning in Paradise, but the bad beat sessions have made me rethink about my win rate. In Paradise even 500 hours are not enough to give you a close estimate.
For all those who has not played there for at least 500 hours, please don't make comments like
"Most of you who THINK that you are winning players are NOT. "
Respect other's thought, the game might not be what you think it is.
This was an excelent post (don't let your head get any bigger than it already is). You summarized all the feelings that I've had about online poker. I am a winning live game player, but during my initial forray into online poker, I went through $800 trying to figure out what was going wrong. Fortunately I chose to try LL games first, like 1-2. Now I believe I am a slightly winning online player, and have the potential to be a solid winner.
What differences have you noticed Pro? How have you changed your game for online play?
On collusion:
I too have been looking closely for collusion, but each time I suspected it, both players had very playable hands. I think players sometimes subconciously try to use collusion as a scapegoat for their "unadjusted" playing style.
Ya know, I could go into all the tricks I've learned for playing online. I don't think I really want to reveal what they are, however, because some secrets are too good to make public knowledge.
I will say this.
I have a couple of different 'modes' I play in.
Sometimes I play at the top limits and I study very carefully. I know all of the players and I keep index cards on their tendencies - I probably know more about how some of them play than they do themselves. I will very rarely play more than one game of 20-40 at the same time - and I will NEVER do this if there is a single player I don't know. The games are tough enough to require a lot of concentration.
I have another 'gear' that I play in, like right now.
Sometimes when I am doing other things on the computer, I will set myself up in a couple of lower limit games. In these games, I play by a very basic formula. I pay almost no attention to the other players. I have a formula for how to play preflop VS the number of limpers, people left to act, preflop raise, etc.
After the flop I have a similar, albeit much more loosely defined, formula.
I play by this formula in these lower limit games and I always win. Oh, of course not ALWAYS, but over time, yes.
In these [low limit] games, I play by a very basic formula. I pay almost no attention to the other players. I have a formula for how to play preflop VS the number of limpers, people left to act, preflop raise, etc.
After the flop I have a similar, albeit much more loosely defined, formula.
I play by this formula in these lower limit games and I always win. Oh, of course not ALWAYS, but over time, yes.
Pro, most of the players who post here about online poker use that exact strategy when playing low limits. I think you've been quite lucky not to run bad because when the cards turn against you, it seems like every hand has been set up to give you a great flop and then kill you in the later streets.
I'm sure you have not experienced a run like this and I'm glad for you. But it's a simple fact that most of us employ the same strategy you describe but not all of us "always win". The strategy you describe is not so hard to execute. To assume that all of the posters here are too dumb to use this simple winning formula is even too big a stretch for MY low opinion of the general public.
In fact, many players on PP have lost overall in the low limit games using good hand selection and typical solid play, and while facing terrible opponents who make egregious errors at every opportunity.
natedogg
You guys say that you are looking for signs of collusion, how in the world are you going to spot it? I know that you are refering to sticking people in the middle and so forth. You don't need to do this to have a big earn colluding, just the extra information on knowing what your team members have folded is more than enough to have a decent edge. Read the last post I made "Understanding collusion."
It would be very difficult to make on-the-fly adjustments to odds calculations, etc, while assimilating all the information given to you by your teammates. I think players good enough to do this competently would be beating the hell out of the games at Paradise anyway.
Chris
Why would you have to make "on the fly" adjustments? All you need to know is how many cards you can see, calculate your outs and pull your odds from a spreadsheet. I can do it immediately with my spreadsheet and simply refer to the printout if you need to.
Hi Ed,
Of course you bring up an excellent point and one that I did not address. We weren't looking for guys telling each other what the other had in those pot limit games and I doubt that kind of thing went on because it would be difficult.
No, we were looking for crossroading and things like that. So I do concede that it would be difficult to spot people sharing information on hole cards.
But how mych of an edge would that really give someone? Of course, if my partner had J2o, I would fold 22 on the button where I might otherwise have played it. And I would likely do the same with 88 after several limpers. And, I would throw QJ of spades in the muck if my fellow colluder had Qh Ts.
The thing I wonder about is this, however. Since most of these people aren't clever enough to figure out how to play a winning game of poker in the first place, despite the thousands of pages of material published on the subject, can we expect them to be smart enough to figure out how to collude effectively, given that there is almost NOTHING written on this subject?
My answer is no. Only a select few people can beat the easiest poker games despite the fact that a roadmap to success has been written for them and all they have to do is pay attention and color inside the lines. They can't even do that. How can we expect that there are more than a tiny tiny handful of people that can actually collude effectively?
The odds advantage after seeing the flop with 6 hands known at the table is between 25% and 33% over your myopic opponents. That is huge.
You may think that only a tiny handful of people can collude succesfully, but that is all you need to get creamed whenever you go up against them. If 10% of the fisherman catch 90% of the fish, then out of 2000 players on Paradise, 200 of them can actually play the game in a winning fashion. If 10% are colluders, then 20 players could be playing multiple hands. If each had 2 computers and colluded with 2 others (60 nicks), you'd have 6 hands at 10 tables. Maybe that's high, but even if it is cut in half, you still have undetectable land mines at 5 low limit tables. It's only a matter of time until you run into them.
I've stated before that I think the colluders are at the lowest limits where loose passive play is the norm. Colluders can go undetected from game to game and the harvest is on. It only takes a relatively tiny handful to make a big impact on your win rate.
If I was smart enough and well-resourced enough to do the things you describe, I would just beat the game straight up at the higher limits.
You should stop looking for hidden reasons why you don't perform as well as you expect on Paradise and look to your game instead. The low limit games on Paradise are very beatable. I know because I beat them. I haven't seen ANY evidence at all of the kind of activity you describe. The bad players lose. Good players win. Things are as they should be.
Chris
Chris, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to do this, and it doesn't take a lot of money to do this either. If you don't have the capacity to understand that this is easy, cheap and undetectable, then how can you be so adamant that this could not happen? I think that you and the other pro online posters have your head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. An open mind would simply be willing to explore the possibility and comment rationally.
I'm pretty tired of the assumption that all who grumble about online poker are losing players. I assure you that I am a winning player at live games. I have also won online. I don't play there because I can conceive of the unfair advantage colluders have over honest players. Plus I've seen some pretty odd things happen. My faith in human nature makes me very cautious and unwilling to buck the odds.
I find it odd that you are so totally sure that it doesn't happen. Why don't you try to moderate your stance to become reasonable instead of unbelievable?
Does online cheating occur? Well you can debate it forever but one thing is for sure since time began...if money is involved people will try to cheat you out of it. If you believe that a web site dealing in real money open to the public is not under attack to every conceivable scam known to man then you are really living a closed life. Are people are trying to cheat?..sure.. are they sucessful at their attempts is the real question.
Do casinos monitor cheating? Sure their are cameras everywhere. Do people still try to scam casinos? Yes happens all the time. So what makes people think that online gambling is any different. By the way if you where to try cheating which venue would you choose that would offer less risk...Paradise Poker or the Mirage?
What conclusion are we supposed to draw from your post?
I do agree with your statement.
Given that, doesn't it boil down to a personnal decision whether you are comfortable playing online?
If you are willing to take the risk (as I am) then you live with the consequences. It is quite possible I am being cheated (but I don't really care since I haven't had my own money on the table for a long long time). Why does it upset people so much that others are willing to play online?
My guess is that they have lost a ton and the only way they can rationalize it is by convincing others that they were cheated.
Do not respond to DK. He is completely out of line.
dk,
Why did you respond to yep? Nowhere in his post does he complain about being cheated. You seem a bit jumpy. Maybe we should have a new forum for people who see ghosts.
Tom D
You are correct.
I did not really respond to what he was saying and drew the conclusions for him. However, I don't believe anything I said was inherently wrong or insulting (just off topic).
His post certainly implies that online poker is less safe than casino poker.
My answer was "yes I agree with you. However, what conclusions should we draw from that?"
That question still remains as the intent of the post is unclear (at least to me), although for once I thought the topic was interesting.
"It is quite possible I am being cheated (but I don't really care since I haven't had my own money on the table for a long long time). "
It's always your money, assuming that you can cash out. To think otherwise is folly.
I am a psychologist. I am also a serious poker player. I am a consistent winner in live games. Yes I hit losing streaks as we all do in live games. But online I'm in the same camp as Ed Hill. I cannot beat the games consistently and now I am down 60% of my bankroll. I have not lost through bad play - I have lost when having the best of it and losing on the river. Ok, call me an unlucky shrink but thats not the point of my post.
I have been reading your posts here of late and I know this about you from pyschological deductions from the pattern and content of your posts.
(i) You have hit a good run at online poker and think you are infallible
(ii) Your claims as to your win rate are over exaggerated
(iii) You quote "Most of you who THINK that you are winning players are NOT" - this is a very true statement in poker in general but in your case it emphasizes your self deluding, false confidence that because you have run well for a short while you are a better player than others.
(iv) You quote "David has touched on this before" - this comment displays your elevated overconfidence that you are a magnificent player by referring to David Sklansky as "David" - putting yourself on a par with him. You do not know him. He does not know you. You are not in his league. Don't delude yourself.
(v) You quote in another post "A winning player only has to buy in ONE time" - This statement proves your ignorance of the fluctuations of poker.
(vi) The fact that you call yourself "Pro" is more glaring proof that you are an inexperienced amateur poker hobbyist who, having run good for a while, thinks he is a professional (on first name terms with other professionals).
(vii)The figures you quote (in other posts) as to your bankroll and the limits you play are clearly exaggerated. My deduction is that 3-6 to 5-10 are your comfort zone games and you have been running well, thru good luck and cards, online at those limits
(viii) I agree with Natedogg that you have not yet experienced a serious downswing online yet. This is verified by point (v) above
(ix) You have a small penis and compensate for this by inflating your ego as a poker player.
Enjoy your short rush.
What about me? I play 1/2 and sometimes 2/4. I have an amount of money online currently measured in 3 digits. And I think that the games are very, very easy to beat (at the limits I play and they don't get much tougher all the way up to 5/10. Friends who can afford to play in these games beat them). And yes, I think that those people who try and claim a bias in the PP games because they can't beat them are simply players who are not good enough to beat the game and unable to face up to that fact.
What's the diagnosis, Doctor?
BTW: I see this in posts all the time: "I haven't lost through bad play... I just lose on the river when I had the best of it". Just because this is true doesnt mean you are playing a good game. It can mean quite the opposite. If I fold anything I flop worse than top two pair, I'll almost always have the best hand. I'll also lose millions.
Chris
I wouldnt know the diagnosis for you Chris. I havent played 1/2 or 2/4 for over 15 years now. If you're as good as you say why are you playing those limits?
I'm a student. I don't have a job. Any increase above what I need to play 1/2 gets cashed out and spent, not used to move up limits. Because of the current state of the Australian dollar i am really playing 2/4 and 4/8 in terms of cost of living. I make about 15 Australian dollars an hour (3.5 BB/hr over two tables) which is a liveable wage - about what you would expect to be paid on a first job - I could actually make a living playing these limits. So far PP has paid for a computer, an internet connection, two trips interstate and a ski holiday to New Zealand, and I have $AU 2,000 left. I'm doing OK at the limits I'm at.
I wouldn't expect my profit to increase proportionally to the limits, because the games get a bit harder as you move up. To double my 1/2 profits I'd have to move up to at least 3/6, at the cost of more than tripling my variance.
Chris
Fill this prescription doc.
What would you rather do -
Win a couple of vacations, computer, rent money etc playing online, or throw away over half your bankroll?
Maybe you should take a page from Chris' book.
By the way, folks around here like to hear advice from players who WIN. Please keep your losing advice to yourself.
Thanks for the psychoanalysis. Where should I send the bill?
Riddle me this doctor -
I'm running over the games online and you've blown 60% of your bankroll. Which one of us is the chump?
I guess it would be the guy who is still paying rent.
If you interested, I am a winning player at paradise. And, I can prove it!! I have a saved document (using print screen function) of all the checks received from PP. I am winning a huge amount and I can tell you that yes, I have experienced the dryspell that occurs online. I talked to professional players that have played for a living for 20+ years and they said it happens in real live poker too.
If you are a losing player on PP it's b/c you are playing bad for the most part. Yes, sure you can lose with a great hand and then feel it's fixed. But what about when you suck out on someone else?? Seems ok then right? When I had my "dryspell" I did some serious thinking about that period. And, my conclusion is that I just played poorly and got what I deserved.
Shelly
If you are a losing player on PP it's b/c you are playing bad for the most part.
I could buy this explanation except for one thing.
In addition to winning consistently at live play, I have accounts at Planet Poker, Highlands and TruePoker. I win consistently at these sites. At Paradise, I generally break even, but I have experienced the polonged downswings others have complained about. If it is my own bad play that causes this, what is it about Paradise that makes so many people play badly?
I am not inclined to accept conspiracy theories, but the "you're just playing badly" theory is hardly more satisfying.
I am also puzzled by those who argue that the speed of Paradise, i.e. more hands per hour, somehow increases the variance. The last time I looked, the sample size N is found in the denominator of the variance formula, and so long as it remains there, variance will continue to decrease as the sample size increses.
The speed of Paradise doesn't increase the variance but it increases the speed at which this variance occurs. People can experience a swing online in hours which would have taken them several weekends of live play to experience.
I don't know why you lose at Paradise but it's probably just because the game is either more difficult or somehow different. The game is VERY different to my local homegame. If I tried to use either strategy in the other game, I would be crushed.
Chris.
Hi Fischer,
"I am also puzzled by those who argue that the speed of Paradise, i.e. more hands per hour, somehow increases the variance. The last time I looked, the sample size N is found in the denominator of the variance formula, and so long as it remains there, variance will continue to decrease as the sample size increses."
It is true, variance goes down in comparison to your overall expected earn as you play more hands per hour. However, the absolute magnitude of your hourly variance is proportional to the number of hands one plays per hour. If one plays twice as many hands per hour then their hourly variance would be expected to increase approximately 1.41 times and their expected earn will approximately double. So, their coefficient of variability will go down, but their hourly variance will increase and the quantity of hands per hour increases.
William
After I had bad experiences and saw many miracle draws like you did, I gave up playing Texas hold'em.
Now I am playing Omaha H/L and Seven Card Stud H/L.
If you cannot ask dealer for either a new setup, dealer change or his deck change unlike live ones, so you should change your seats, tables, poker sites, or even GAMES.
I believe that Texas hold'em is more likely to be affected by those random number generator kind of things than any other poker games because you only have 2 pocket cards and 5 cards on board to make a hand.
As you know, even on 10 handed Hold'em game, we use only 28 cards and there are 24 cards remain unused. (20 cards dealt for 2 pocket cards to each of 10 players, 1 card burned, 3 cards on flop, 1 card burned, 1 card on turn, 1 card burned, 1 card on river; so 28 cards total, just a half of deck)
THE LESS CARDS ARE USED FOR DEALING, THE MORE LIKELY QUALITY OF STACKED (shuffled) CARDS AFFECT THE GAME.
Anyway, my point is that YOU SHOULD QUIT PLAYING TEXAS HOLD'EM AND CHANGE YOUR GAME before you change poker sites or whatever if you believe those conspiracy theories out there.
Last but not least, I still believe somewhere there must be a kind of software like 'sniffer' that shows every player's hand and conditions like whether or not his BET/RAISE button is pressed.
If it is not out now, it would be out in next few years.
Unfortunately, I don't have any evidences now but you have already seen some players who bet out first with trash hands but made unbelievable draws on turn and river.THEY SEEM LIKE THEY KNOW WHAT CARDS ARE COMING NEXT.
It must be technically possible because every server and client software has its security holes.
You know Microsoft Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator both have a lots of security holes found one after another, right?
If hackers make the program that can access those poker server programs as ADMIN (administrator) mode, or if they steal and analyze data sending and receiving online between your client software and poker site's server software, they will know what hand you are playing now and what you are about to do with that.
Or we are simply playing with those players who we think human being but acutually computer ROBOT SHILLS with artificial intelligence.
Well, my imagination is endless. BUT THEY ARE TECNICALLY POSSIBLE. YES, just TECHNICALLY.
A wake up call to the "conspiracists". The article outlines organized crime money laundering through internet gambling. It doesn't mention poker sites, but then again, it doesn't disclaim poker sites either.Battling Online Casino Rip-offs Do Internet Gambling Sites Cheat Players? March 19, 1999
By Jim Krane
LONDON (APBnews.com) -- Law enforcement officials say a fast-growing number of Internet casinos have the ability to defraud millions of dollars from unsuspecting gamblers, and are almost impossible to police.
Gambling schemes already appear on some 300 online casino Web sites based in obscure countries around the globe, according to experts speaking at the International Criminal Intelligence Analysts Conference recently held here.
And, as virtual casinos proliferate, a study released this week reported that more than 5 million Americans are pathological or problem gamblers. Another 15 million are at risk of becoming just like them, according to the study prepared for the National Gambling Impact Study Commission by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago.
People are about twice as likely to be problem or pathological gamblers if a casino is within 50 miles of their home, the study found. But with Internet access, gamblers don't need to bother driving to a casino.
"People can gamble away their life savings from the comfort of their own homes," said Randall Allen of the FBI's organized-crime section.
No regulation
Gamblers who wager in most land-based casinos can at least count on regulatory oversight by a government body. On the Internet, oversight and regulation is, for now, nonexistent.
Some Internet gaming sites may be legitimate, said Allen. But gamblers -- and police -- have no way of knowing. Some sites refuse to pay a gambler's winnings. Others calibrate their games so players can't win. Some sell players' credit card information, Allen said.
Some online casinos simply disappear after taking gambling deposits from bettors, said Allen and Lewis Endlar, a researcher at Britain's Manchester Metropolitan University. In a single day last year, Allen said eight online casinos disappeared with wagers they collected.
"Sites are taking wagers, closing down and reopening elsewhere," Endlar said. "You might think you're a valued customer until, one day, you log on and the casino isn't there. It can close down in a few seconds. They're doing this regularly."
And, as the problems -- and frauds -- grow, most law enforcement officials and legislators aren't even aware of the issue, which threatens to become a cross-jurisdictional nightmare of licensing, enforcement and extradition issues, Allen and Endlar said.
Most are legitimate
Law enforcement's worries are legitimate, said Sue Schneider, chairwoman of the Canada-based Internet Gaming Council, but its understanding of the industry is foggy.
RELATED LINKS:
List of problem casino sites
National Gambling Impact Study Commission
Gamblers Anonymous
800-GAMBLER on Internet gambling
Woman battles debt
Reports of Internet gambling crimes are just starting to filter in, but the potential for criminal gain is enormous, Allen and Endlar told crime analysts at the conference organized by Britain's National Criminal Intelligence Service.
A California woman ran up $70,000 in credit card debt after getting hooked on a gambling Web site, Allen said. She's fighting to prevent paying on the premise that Internet gambling is illegal in the United States, he said.
Virtual economy
Internet casinos are just one segment of a growing -- and, to law enforcement officials, troubling -- virtual economy that sits outside the reach of the world's police systems. Other speakers at the conference lamented the enormous potential for fraud on Web sites involving banking, investing, telecommunications and general commerce.
Industry analysts such as the marketing firm DataMonitor predict online gambling will handle $5 billion to $10 billion in wagers by 2002. Even in such a heavily monied environment, there is no consensus on how to judge a reputable site.
Richard Bonsall, CEO of GoBet Inc., a California-based company that produces offshore gaming sites, lamented that no reliable system exists that allows users to check a site's authenticity and security.
"It's a tough one for the consumer," Bonsall said. "There are a lot of sharks out there."
To gauge a site's authenticity, Bonsall said he looks for secure server connections, a professional design and some evidence of longevity. In this spanking-new industry, a 6-month-old site becomes venerable.
Schneider said new users should prowl gambling bulletin boards for reports on bad casinos. Unlicensed sites should be avoided, she said.
Bet with Bubba
GoBet, which uses secure server connections for its credit card transactions, hopes one further asset might win it some cachet of authenticity: a celebrity endorsement.
The company recently signed an online gaming endorsement with former football and screen star Bubba Smith. The result is a site called Bubba Smith's Internet Casino & Sportsbook, which, because of "legal uncertainties," accepts bets only from gamblers outside the United States and Canada, said Bonsall.
Still illegal in the U.S.
Internet gambling is particularly worrisome because outdated laws and enforcement technology can't be leveraged against it, Endlar said.
Since the U.S. Interstate Wire Act of 1961 makes it a crime to accept bets over telephone lines, most of the gambling sites are based in 30-odd countries outside the United States. Many sit on island nations in the Caribbean and Pacific, such as the Dominican Republic, Fiji, Costa Rica, Panama and Antigua, Endlar said. A few reside in Europe and Australia.
The U.S. Department of Justice's Financial Task Force on Money Laundering estimated that Russian organized crime is using Internet gambling sites in the South Pacific to launder $1.5 million per month, Allen said.
But the problem works both ways. If a casino operator notices a suspicious transaction -- such as a player's large deposit and quick withdrawal without much gambling -- there is currently no clear enforcement agency to report to, said Schneider.
No need to travel
The Internet's popularity and provisions for electronic commerce make for staggering earnings potential for virtual casinos, Allen and Endlar said.
Gamblers no longer need to drive to a casino to play. They wager from any computer with Internet access -- mainly from home or work. In the United States last year, gamblers dropped $600 billion in legal casinos. No figures exist for Internet casinos, but Allen and Endlar predicted gamblers' losses are burgeoning quickly.
On a computer, gambling's addictive lure is trebled, Endlar said. The habit-forming characteristics of computer games and the secure feeling of wagering in one's home multiplies a gambler's daring -- and losses, he said.
Allen and Endlar predicted that authorities will grapple with several aspects of online gambling in the near future:
Frauds are difficult, if not impossible, to prosecute. Law enforcement officials and auditors have no way to monitor transactions or levy taxes.
Young computer users, uninitiated to the money-losing realities of gambling, could squander parents' savings simply by securing a credit card number.
Internet gambling is ideal for money laundering. Mobsters with illicit cash can easily pass it through a friendly gambling site. Mafias have already established or invested in online casinos, said Allen. "To authorities, the money looks like winnings from gambling," he said.
Cash-rich gambling sites make lucrative targets for computer hackers, who may seek to steal funds stored on casino computers.
Virtual casinos are metamorphosing into online banks, offering high rates of interest to players who store money. Security of such banks is untested and unregulated. Potential for depositors' losses is enormous. A bill fails
Aware of the problem, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., introduced the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act, which passed a Senate vote by 90-10 last July, but died when the House omitted it from the budget package approved later.
The bill sought to criminalize the placing or accepting of bets via the Internet. Critics -- including the U.S. Department of Justice -- have decried its proposed sanctions against individual bettors as unenforceable. The Justice Department also complained that the bill's provisions for prosecuting operators of gambling sites outside the United States was beyond its jurisdiction.
Under Kyl's bill, gamblers faced three months' imprisonment and fines of up to $500. Businessmen running gambling sites might have been imprisoned for four years and fined $20,000 or three times the amount of bets accepted. Internet service providers would have had to rid their servers of gambling sites.
No stopping now
But even with strident prohibitions, experts doubt Internet gambling can be halted. Bonsall described Kyl's efforts as "trying to get the toothpaste back into the tube."
"Prohibition isn't going to work," said Schneider. "So why not tax it and regulate it?"
Despite the hazy legality of Internet gaming in the United States, Schneider estimated that American gamblers form up to 90 percent of clientele on some sites. And, despite online casinos being based outside the United States, many of their owners are American entrepreneurs, she said.
"They're going where they're welcome," Schneider said.
Weakest link
Law enforcement officials attempting to prosecute Internet gambling fraud might have their best chance targeting the site's Internet service provider, if the site's location can't be traced, Endlar suggested.
But ironically, said Endlar, the best way to combat fraudulent sites may be to refer gamblers to legitimate sites known to pay winnings.
A license to earn
For $100,000 or so, an entrepreneur can purchase a license to operate an Internet casino from a smattering of countries, mainly in the Caribbean and Latin America, said Bonsall. A Web site established by the government of Antigua offers online casino licenses for $100,000 and online sports betting licenses for $75,000.
Such a license doesn't ensure a casino's immunity from cheating, said Bonsall, but it helps. An operation that invested in a license is less likely to disappear, he said.
A search of the 285 sites listed on the Rolling Good Times Web site, a clearing house on Internet gambling, shows that perhaps one fifth of sites were listed as unlicensed. Another section on the site contains information on gambling operations that have disappeared or refused to pay winnings.
Software protection
In Washington, a startup software company called Quixotic Solutions, believes it is close to a solution to the issue of gambling sites' reliability. The company is developing gaming security software that verifies fairness, said Steve Davis, Quixotic's CEO.
"It gives players a way to shuffle the deck over the network so that the casino can't manipulate the shuffle," Davis said. "The player can check on their own computer to see whether they've been cheated."
In order to function, Davis said his software must be installed on the casino's Internet server as well as the gambler's personal computer. The program can't, of course, ensure that a site pays its winnings.
Jim Krane is an APBnews.com staff writer (jimk@apbnews.com).
bfd
And this is article relevant to this discussion forum because of why?
because some very rational people that take offense to fraudulent activities, and believe that poker should be run cleanly, have not been satisfied by the specious arguments of people like you.
Write your congressman or argue it on r.g.p -- Please!
No.
I’d like to point out that this forum is dedicated to the discussion of online poker strategy. It’s not your platform to be used in a religious anti-online crusade. There are many of us logging in hoping we can find a way to improve our online skills or hear the latest (factual and relevant) news but instead, we just hear the same half-baked paranoid anti-online arguments, ad nauseam.
How would you like it if you staged a beer, pizza, babes and poker party in your back yard only to have James Dobson stand on a ladder and drone on with a megaphone over the fence “YOU’RE ALL BEING CHEATED. THE PEOPLE RUNNING THIS PARTY ARE CROOKS. THERE ARE MOBSTERS AMONG YOU…”
All of you religious crusaders are welcome to start your own web site and use it as your platform. You’re simply being very rude to the rest of us who would like to participate in an intelligent discussion.
We’ve heard you.
Who appointed you forum police? If these types of posts by concerned players are not allowed, then it just becomes a circle jerk of satisfied online junkies. If the hosts don't want the negative posts, then they should say so. Come to think of it, why don't we hear more from our hosts on the subject?
Dude, just what burning bush in the Nevada desert did you see that said you must go on some rightists holy religious crusade to denounce the evils of online poker? You probably do run a brick and mortar poker room, mr downer. Follow the money, as they say.
It should be obvious to you that the entrepreneurs of this forum had something else in mind or like you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Can you respect their wishes and quite baiting them? Maybe respect the wishes of so many of us who would like to use this forum to improve our skills? Go start your own anti-online site, my stressed out friend. I suggest that you call it "Focus on the Felt" or something equally sanctified.
Chip, you and all the others, are being extremely rude by pushing your religious crusade onto people who are tired of hearing about it. It's not you party, dude! You're just being tiresome and rude. Sorry.
Dude......
Online poker is not evil. I think it is a great idea. There is nothing I'd like better than to sit in my home and play money poker. I don't own a B&M card room. The fact that you get so defensive when confronted with something that goes against what you believe shows immaturity and a lack of tolerance. Try to keep an open mind to ideas other than your own.
Dude....sheeesh
Incorrect.
This is the foum titled "Internet Poker." The forum YOU are referring to is "Theory and Strategy."
-á
The original post of this thread was not the r.g.p. scum that we are accustomed to. It is just an article warning those of Internet gambling fraud. You should take a back seat to this one.
-á
I think it basically means to be careful.
á
Wow, I just read an article about Mad Cow Disease that also failed to mention online poker, so I guess the evidence that it's illegitimate is piling up ....
The sole reference to "organized crime" and "money laundering" that Andrew thinks people should assume about online poker and probably Paradise Poker in particular: Russian OC is using "[i]nternet gambling sites in the South Pacific to launder $1.5 million per month..." (emphasis added). On the other hand, I once heard of an important magazine editor that thought that British Columbia was in Latin America.
And of course, the phrase that always appears in these articles that the "Andrews" of the world proves the opposite of what it says: "Most [online gambling sites] are legitimate."
Here's my conspiracy theory: the online poker industry is seeding these discussions with anonymous crank posts in order to bolster their credibility by suggesting that their detractors tend to "think" like "Andrew."
Thats a rather offensive reply for someone simply asking for the large companies to self regulate. I'd say that the author was emotional, and prone to tilt. If calling for self-regulation is faulty logic, then I guess that all laws in the United States regarding fraud (state and federal) should be repealed. I don't think that this is logical.
In the stock market the motto in the USA is " In God We Trust, all others have to answer to the SEC." You must be one of those people that thinks FDR was a communist for making laws which put capitalist crooks in jail. Oh, I forgot, no crooks exist in the United States. No crooks exist in Latin America. The only crooks that exist were those Roosevelt Democrats.
Ivan Boesky loves you, Chris.
Thank you Andrew for your wise words.
Question: If you are utg with KQs in a tight game do you raise, fold or just call?
Tight game, fold. Loose game limp.
Could you please leave the Doug Grant crap on RGP? This forum has enough garbage now.
No.
Dear Mason, It is rocket scientists like yourself and Sklansky that requries my presence both here and at RGP. The two of you have been accepting payoffs to advertise Paradise Poker for well over a year despite and notwithstanding the criminality of the site that was first reported by me in late 1999 and now has been corroborated by well over 500 other players many of them recognized "world class" players. The two of you are nothing more than common predators, neither of you have the "cojones" to sit and play in an ordinary ring game either on or off line. I have played with both of you and have read every word either of you have had printed and not a scintilla of truth has EVER been uttered by either of you. What you don't get is that because i am so credible and not afraid of anything, is that the negative feeback i elicit is nothing more than pure jealously that Ross had the balls to speak up. Those who know me and that is all that play in any East Coast casino know that i am always truthful to a fault. Keep accepting payoffs from Paradise for i will have the last laugh when you and Sklansky are both in the dock somewhere for conspiracy to defraud. neal ross.
(sigh)
Did you run out of your medication again, Neal?
Apparently not. Notice that this time he's not threatening to send terrorists to kill everyone that disagrees with him.
Speaking of terrorists, it’s a pity how this forum has degenerated into the noise of rec.gambling.blackjack. The religious zealots protecting us from the evils of online gambling are every bit as out of place just as The Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini would be at a Superbowl beer party.
Neal,
You forgot to end with " Don't forget to sign up at (or return to) Pokerspot. Many of us are waiting for the rake to eat up your bankroll so we can receive the money that is owed to us."
Bye the way, is it true that you have received ALL money that is owed to you? (Which you stated in an earlier thread.)
Yes, i have reveived all cashouts requested from Pokerspot, i received a check for $250 which actually was a cc refund due me from January and i received a check for $2158 a requested cashout. I know many have not received all that was promised and i have no personal knowledge as to who Pokerspot is paying and how much they are getting paid. I think they are doing the best that they can and as mentioned before the only way everyone is going to be happy is for EVERYONE to start playing there. I for one truly believe in the good intentions of Russ Boyd, i think he was wrong for opening the site undercapitalized but if there was any doubt that he planned to abscond with all the player money those doubts are now extinguished. For those of you that have a vested interest in Pokerspot like myself that it is stupidity not to play there.
I don't know. 4 Knights seems to be okay.
á
You probably should post a statement clarifying your payback status and also putting some distance between your site and Neal Ross.
That's very good advice. Mason usually does have good advice. I wish that he would come out in favor of the online ownership forming a self regulating body that would disclose financial realities. It is not an unreasonable request. It is no more unreasonable than asking live poker rooms to go non-smoking.
What do you do if you don't like pornography? Don't look at it.
What do you do if you object to the book Slaughterhouse Five? Don't read it.
What do you do if you don't like Sklansky and Malmuth?
Post moronic rants about it on 2+2?
Chris
hi- I have been a long time player on paradise and have had all the up and down swings. I recently started keep records on my play.
So far I have only 350 hours logged in at various games so I am still far away from having an accurate win rate.
After getting my bankroll injured playing 15-30 (only a 2,000 bankroll at the time) I decided to start over at the lower limits to rebuild.
I want to start at 1-2 and move up as my bankroll grows.
I know others have suggested having 300BB to avoid going broke.
Does that take into account that the player may (in my case will) drop down a limit? If so when should they do that? (with 100BB left?)
I plan to move up limits until I get to about 10-20 or so.
Can anyone help me with a guide for when I should move up?
example-- 1-2 play until you have 400.00 then go to 2-4 if you lose more than 200.00 go back to 1-2. At 2-4 once you get to 600 move to 3-6. If you lose more than 200 at 3-6 go back to 2-4 etc....
these are just random numbers.
What numbers should I use in making my guidelines? Thanks stud
300BB seems too high, go to 200. if it drops by half, move,etc---BUT most important thing I can point out is that a recent posting said that at some lower level the RAKE becomes such a large %, that it makes game hard to beat. I have not looked down there and computed, but you should. good luck, Jim
1st: decide on how much risk you want. Do you want to absolutely maximise your BR growth, damn the fluctuations, or have a slower, steadier pace? (Do an internet search on Kelly betting if you want more details.)
2nd: measure your win rate and standard deviation. Again, there are resources here on 2p2. (look in the essays section.)
3rd: Calculate your needed BR units.
Ultra risky: BR = STD*STD/WinRate Ultra COnservative: BR = 2.25*STD*STD/WinRate.
Devide your dough by your units, round down to the next available limit, and voila.
By doing it this way, you naturally get more conservative duning a cold streak (your win rate goes down) and more aggressive as you get better and your win rate improves.
zooey
P.S. the bad part about this method is it takes a long time for your win rate to converge, maybe about 600 hours to get it to within +- 0.5, as the uncertainty goes roughly as your STD/sqare_root(hours_played). So I adjust my win rte downward by half this number, just to be sure.
You should only play in a limit that you have AT LEAST 300 BB for. And if you play 2 games at once it should be more.
Drop down when you hit 299.9 BB. Simple as that.
That isnt right at all lol. If you're dropping down a limit as soon as you have 299 BB, you dont have any money to play the limit with. You would need 600 BB to play a limit adequately if you were going to drop down at the 300 mark. If you start playing a limit at 300 BB and continue playing no matter what, statistically its very very unlikely you'll go broke. 300 BB is plenty to start at a limit with. If you plan to keep dropping down limits and don't mind the fact that this will slow down your profit as you spend time playing at lower limits, then you need less, eg if you were playing at 3-6 and planned to drop down to 2/4 and then 1/2 and you planned to drop down a level every time you lost 100BB, then you need $2 x 100 + $4 * 100 + $6 * 100 = $1200 makes 300 big bet equivalents, as against $1800 if you just want to play 3/6.
Hope that made sense
Chris
Thought I'd post this, since it seemed like a unique hand and I won it.
Table "Bridgetown" (real money) -- Seat 1 is the button Seat 1: GeeDee ($322 in chips) Seat 2: Tablecleaner ($289 in chips) Seat 3: SteveOMS ($258 in chips) Seat 4: Chauncey ($191 in chips) Seat 5: ziegz ($70 in chips) Seat 6: No Foldem ($43 in chips) Seat 7: mt4132 ($106 in chips) Seat 8: KittyHawk2 ($727.50 in chips) Seat 9: Gookhead ($114 in chips) Seat 10: eppefour ($170 in chips) Tablecleaner: Post Small Blind ($1) SteveOMS: Post Big Blind ($3) Dealing... Dealt to GeeDee [ Ac ] Dealt to GeeDee [ Ah ] Chauncey: Fold ziegz : Call ($3) No Foldem: Fold mt4132 : Fold KittyHawk2: Fold Gookhead: Raise ($6) eppefour: Call ($6) GeeDee : Raise ($9) Tablecleaner: Fold SteveOMS: Fold ziegz : Raise ($9) Gookhead: Call ($6) eppefour: Call ($6) GeeDee : Call ($3) *** FLOP *** : [ Td 5c As ] ziegz : Check Gookhead: Bet ($3) eppefour: Raise ($6) GeeDee : Call ($6) ziegz : Call ($6) Gookhead: Raise ($6) eppefour: Call ($3) GeeDee : Raise ($6) ziegz : Call ($6) Gookhead: Call ($3) eppefour: Call ($3) *** TURN *** : [ Td 5c As ] [ 2c ] ziegz : Check Gookhead: Bet ($6) eppefour: Raise ($12) GeeDee : Raise ($18) ziegz : Fold Gookhead: Call ($12) eppefour: Call ($6) *** RIVER *** : [ Td 5c As 2c ] [ 4s ] Gookhead: Check eppefour: Bet ($6) GeeDee : Call ($6) Gookhead: Call ($6) No Foldem said, "vnh" *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $169 | Rake: $3 Board: [ Td 5c As 2c 4s ] GeeDee bet $48, collected $169, net +$121 (showed hand) [ Ac Ah ] (three of a kind, aces) Tablecleaner lost $1 (folded) SteveOMS lost $3 (folded) Chauncey didn't bet (folded) ziegz lost $24 (folded) No Foldem didn't bet (folded) mt4132 didn't bet (folded) KittyHawk2 didn't bet (folded) Gookhead lost $48 (showed hand) [ Tc Th ] (three of a kind, tens) eppefour lost $48 (showed hand) [ 5d 5s ] (three of a kind, fives)
Has anyone recieved the 2nd instalment of their payout yet????
I think that they promised middle of May right???
Since my middle of April payment arrived in the middle of May I'd expect the middle of May payment to arrive sometime after hell has in fact frozen over. I'm keeping expectations low.
$600 (performing!) PokerSpot debt available for $200 cash. Any takers?
I'll take it, but I can't afford to actually give you money till I get the money they owe me ;).
Hi all , i offer everybody a bet that i'm able to predict the rivercard at any Hold'Em table at Paradise Poker within 15 sec. after the turn card was dealt. I bet $50000 if i get 10 to 1 ! Anybody who interrested may contact me. I offer a contract with any attorney of your trust . The money is only paid if i can prove it and you may bring a witness. My and your bet will be deposit at the attorney of your trust. This is not especially against Paradise it's just the first online-poker-site i tried. Other online-poker-sites will follow if possible.
hmmmm Mason? Any comment on this? Or if no comment, taking the bet?
I get a funny feeling this guy is serious about predicting the river card.
Are you willing to take the element of luck out of the equation?
For instance lets say you fell you found a bug in the program but are wrong, there is still a chance you will get the river card right. 10-1 would be a bad bet for you, but I think your bet is to show that you found a real bug in the program, not that you can get lucky eaven if your wrong about the bug.
I dont know how you can do this, but it should not be to hard.
I find this post VERY troubling, and certainly hope that Paradise Poker themselves will show the confidence to take the bet... and let all of us be witness to it.
That’s a very intriguing claim and if it’s true, congratulations! You deserve to make a ton of money. But you will want to establish some serious credibility because no one wants to feel like a fool investing time and resources on an anonymous post with an unlikely claim.
Have your attorney post your message along with his/her contact information and the terms specifically spelled out. You can still remain anonymous if you wish, attorney/client relationship and all that. You would be doing a great service for everyone who plays at Paradise if your claim is true. Otherwise, intelligent and serious people have no choice but to consider this just a lot of hot air… Just one more anonymous internet post, out of millions, that boasts a very unlikely claim.
You’ve got nothing to lose. If your claim is true, you would win your challenge plus make a fortune as a security consultant for all the online sites and more power to you!
I predict that no one will ever personally see this bullshit happen. 50K huh...I predict he's living in a trailor with 3 dogs and a couple of junk cars parked outside. Or...does mom know your online?
My guess is that before anyone takes your bet (I would think Paradise would be happy to take this bet) that you restate your bet a little more clearly. You should state that you can reveal any river card within 15 seconds after the turn card is shown and BEFORE the river card is shown. Some people may think that you'll just wait till the river card is shown (if it is shown within the 15 seconds you stated) and just say what the card is. I'm sure you didnt mean it that way but you should state more clearly before undergoing the wager. I also assume that by stating what the river card is you mean the RANK and SUIT of the card.
I'll give you some credit, you have aroused the curiousity of many of us.
The guy's just trolling. Interesting to see how many people take the prat seriously.
It occurs to me that if *I* could predict the river card, I'd just go online and win money. I wouldn't tell a soul. Just a thought...
Perfect. If you could cheat, you would. If you could collude, you would. My faith in human nature is confirmed. I guess it's just a matter of your abilities whether you cheat or not. How many people are smarter than you with the same lack of moral fortitude? Need/desire and opportunity meet and you have a criminal or amoral act likely to occur.
Can anyone tell me how Paradise became the dominant online casino? Please, no answers of jiggling with the software so everybody wins at first - just a simple history of why they beat out Planet and others (I seem to remember Caro's site claiming to be the first one - so the simple answer of 'Paradise was first' doesn't seem to be the case.).
Their software is better than Planets by most accounts. The extra game stats they give you in the game room is useful. They let you chose your seat, unlike Planet. Their tournaments are very popular and for a while they had a monopoly on them.
Caro's site was proven to be hacked by a program that permitted the hackers to know what all the cards were after the flop. This happened before Caro affiliated with them. Paradise claims immunity from this. They haven't allowed independent analysis, however. To their credit, they do appear to pay cashouts with checks that don't bounce. Pokerspot couldn't make the same claim. Personally, I now feel that Caro's site is probably the most legitimate site in the industry. Roy Cooke works to find and bar colluders.
Why did Delta Poker never develop a following?
I found it a friendly site, but they rarely had more than one game going. poor marketing, I suppose
The software at all the other sites SUCKED bigtime.
If you just work, and all the others are annoying, flakey, and have comm problems....U WIN.
Not that someone cant do a much better job than PP, but hey, I've been saying that about Windows for 10 years.
The Paradise software was the first that really worked well and played quickly.
The first online cardrooms were Planet and Delta, as far as I know. Delta didn't advertise enough and the software was very slow. They had no wait lists; you just tried to notice when a seat opened up and sit down before anyone else did. Planet was similar, they've been playing catchup to Paradise since Paradise opened, but they seem to finally have pretty good software. If I recall correctly, Planet and Delta both had only Texas Holdem to start with. Paradise started with 7-Stud and Omaha High I think, and fairly quickly added hilo games.
Pokerspot was the first site to have tournaments, and also seems/claims to be more secure than the others. That's the only reason they can/could compete.
I'm guessing if I sift early enough through the old discussions I might discover that this is as beaten a mule as collusion, but I haven't seen it discussed thoroughly since I've been watching (aside from the 5-player discussion recently).
Are online rakes too high?
The only argument I've seen on this site was just a passing comment that the proof that the rakes are 'correct' is that we are willing to pay them. In a free market economy with many competitors, this is far from the whole story - if gas companies colluded to jack up their prices by 15%, we would still buy enough gas to increase their profits. However, the free market and government controls prevent that from happening in the gasoline market (or the soda market, or the milk market, or . . .) There are no such controls on the online gaming industry.
In a market with many competitors, it becomes natural for them to compete on price when there are excess profits to be had. I can't imagine anyone coming up with a set of assumptions whereby Paradise is not making massively excess (meaning in excess of risk-free income) profits. Perhaps the market does not yet have enough competitors to move these rakes down, but it seems like one of these new ones, like UltimateBet, would offer a lower rake to steal customers from Paradise. I certainly would switch my play to a reputable site with 2/3 the rake Paradise charges in a heartbeat. Why doesn't anyone switch?
Possibly the answer is informal collusion (or even formal collusion - though it seems hard for the colluders to enforce) - all the online sites believe 'If I slash, Paradise slashes the same day, leaving me no new customers and a lower revenue stream.' That's all fine and good for the big sites like Planet Poker, but what about the little ones like UltimateBet? Seems like it would be worth the gamble to try the lower rake when you're revenue stream is virtually zero to begin with.
I'll stop here - I have more meandering thoughts on the topic; hopefully a thoughtful discussion of the matter will address them without my boring those who couldn't possibly care less.
Playing heads up , yes. Otherwise, probably not.
I am a stud player and haved played successfully at Paradise for about 1000 hours (winning about 1.2 BB per hour).
I've been reading about, studying and discussing hold'em for quite a while and decided to take the plunge (stud gets a little old sometimes).
After about 50 hours of play (I know it's not a lot) I feel like I've got a good feel for the differences between the 3/6 and 5/10 tables.
Most of the players I've encountered would not seem out of place at either table. As a matter of fact, I have seen many of them at both denominations. However, I infrequently see horrible players at the 5/10 and also infrequently find a table filled with good players at 3/6.
There was some discussion a few days ago about whether there are really any differences between the two. My experience is that the differences range from subtle to obvious with the bottom line being that 5/10 is definitely a bit tougher.
Overall, after my 50 hours of play I am pennies ahead (better than losing). Funny thing is that I've had more success at 5/10, but I've gotten much better cards in those games.
This morning I was playing 3/6 and leading the action with QQ. On the turn the board was 2 6 7 3 and I was raised by my lone opponent. River was 2 6 7 3 8, he bets and I call. He showed 5 9o and took the pot. Par for the course on 3/6. Not unheard of on 5/10 but much more rare.
I am really starting to enjoy hold'em and look forward to playing it live. I also enjoy playing stud more now that I can switch off. I encourage you hold'em players to give stud a try. We could use some more players.
Here's a very interesting point about Paradise and how they calculate amount to be credited back to your credit card. If you are a consistent player that deposits money via credit card on pp you should know the following. PP only stores the last 20 transactions in your account. So for example when you click on "cash out" and you have more than 20 transactions, not all of them are reflected in your amount that can be credited back to your card. The credit card transactions drop off after the 20 transaction. So if you purchase then win and then cashout, the cashouts force the older credit card transactions off the screen.
My point with telling you this is b/c if you have more than 20 transactions you do not truly know how much you are behind in your account. It might say 2,000 to be credited back to your card but in reality you are really losing 10,000. Only way to know where you are truly is to get a complete credit card transaction history emailed from paradise.
Shelly
One more thing...I wonder if PP does this so that losing players don't know exactly how much they are really losing????? This keeps them coming back trying to win back the "2,000" to be credited back, but it's really 6,000. Get your credit card history so you know exactly where you are!!
Shelly
Only way to know where you are truly is to get a complete credit card transaction history emailed from paradise.
Do you maintain a session diary of some sort on Excel or a similar program? You can very easily track your credit card purchases on there, and only use your Paradise history to verify your own records. This is important, because if you buy chips a little at a time, a cashout comes close to effectively doubling the amount of transactions you have.
Say, for instance you buy $100/week, then after two months, you cash out $800. That will show up as 8 separate $100 credits instead of 1 $800 credit.
Plus, maintaining a session diary lets you know how you're doing versus time, and gives you an easy, sortable means of keeping track of your opponents' play.
The more I think about it, if ParadisePoker DOESN'T call motinka's bluff, it will certainly lend some creedance to his claim, and they will lose MY action there.
This happened to me the other day playing in a $10 tourney.
It was late in the tourney and I was a middle stack. A short stack raised and I re-raised all-in with KQs.
I had him covered and everyone else had folded so it was an all-in confrontation between two people.
As the cards were coming out, I saw a Q flash and then disappear. As the Q flashed I got excited about winning the hand. But then it disappeared!
No queen on the flop or turn but the river card was a queen!
This has only ever happened to me once and I figured it happened because it was an all-in situation where the cards were simply getting dealt out without action.
But now this post by motinka makes me wonder...
natedogg
All-in, the cards are all dealt face up starting with the river card so you spot the river card first. This always happens in YOUR situation--motinkas is an entirely different situation.
One word of caution--DO NOT take motinka's bet, you will lose.
He is not bluffing? You know this? And yet you play at Paradise enough to know the order the cards come down when someone is all-in? Now Im REALLY confused.
The sky is falling...the sky is falling.....He doesn't know. Just ask the defenders of online poker.
This sounds like a big hoax. If he is really able to see the cards, why doesn't he just play and take everyone's money. Please Please!!
and, in response to seeing the queen then having the card disappear then reappear. When you are all-in, the last card appears then rolls to the end and then you see all the cards. If you turn off the "animation" or whatever (I'm not at home to view the term but it's located in the lobby as one of the options that you can disable), the cards are dealt differently to you. I think this will affect how you see the cards dealt to you and how the cards are dealt in the middle.
Shelly
If what you are saying is correct about seeing river card early in allin situation, perhaps that is what his "bet" is based on... only that specific situation and not when multiple players with money are in pot. If that is the case I will feel better, but would like paradise to let us know just what is going on.
If you are worried about it, just send an email to PP with the comments that he posted about being able to see the card before the river. All I know is that I've been able to beat the game consistently without cheating or colluding so I have to believe that everything is on the up and up.
I recently notified PP about someone (i dont know the person but my friend met him) that was selling software for 3500 that would show the cards that everyone else had during the hand. PP assured me that this is impossible and that they have taking several security measures to make sure of it.
Shelly
Well we'll see. I wait for somebody to take my bet !I'll make sure that everybody will be able to witness. I'm not interrested to take advantage of my knowledge and play there. Again; predict of rivercard within 15 sec after turncard was dealt .. before i fold... bet... or raise my hand .
you said in your original message that this also can work with other poker sites not just paradise? so you think you have figured out the way all sites deal randomly their cards? or is this just the same parlor trick that works everywhere? please provide details what it is you say you can do.
i can tell you the river card within 10 or 15 seconds of the turn being dealt too as usually the action on the river happens within that period of time when everyone can see the river card. is this what your all nonsense is about?
I'll say this:
One of my observations of playing at Paradise has been "unusual" long pauses from certain players consistently. Coincidence? Most likely. I'm just pointing it out however.
-á
It's called debug versions. Probably someone close to the development team leaked it out for big cash.
Of course, this is only speculation...
-á
My son has a Barney video where someone is challenged to stand on one finger. A child then walks up, bends down and steps on his finger. Obviously this boast is some silly nonsense like that. The all-in scenario is a good one.
This is all ridiculous. I can't believe it has gotten so many responses. It obviously shows how concerned some people are. If you are really that concerned then just don't play. There isn't anything Paradise, or any other site can do to prove they are completely honest. Of course, if they are not honest, it is theoretically possible to prove that.
We are lending our money to nameless, faceless people who are unregulated and based in another country. If they cheat us we have no recourse. It is a very stressful position to be in.
Dont' encourage this clown by responding to his dumbass bet.
If he knows something (which I doubt he does) he should disclose it or shut the hell up.
I get sick of retarded posts clouding out interesting topics.
Got noone who wants to take my bet yet. The clown is still offering $ 50000 !! However , people like DK will know soon. If i can not find someboby who pays me i will find a way to make some $$$ anyway !!!
Perhaps this person does.
-á
In other words, he can't lose on Paradise.
-á
Of course he can still lose. He can only predict the RIVER card. By the time you get to the river, you have put enough money in the pot. So unless you play drawing hand all the time, knowing what the river card is at the turn without knowing what your opponents are holding only gives you a very slight edge.
im going to lake charles this memorial week-end. so ill be playing 10-20-40 for the first time.i would appreciate any strategy modifications that i should be aware of.i regularly play 10-20.thanks for your help paul
'
This is a typical 1-2 PP game with bad players.
$1/$2 Hold'em - 2001/05/22
Table "Crazy Hold'em" (real money) -- Seat 6 is the button
Seat 1: player 1 ($119.25 in chips)
Seat 2: player 2 ($42.50 in chips)
Seat 4: natedogg ($105.75 in chips)
Seat 5: player 5 ($25.25 in chips)
Seat 6: player 6 ($146.75 in chips)
Seat 7: player 7 ($95 in chips)
Seat 9: player 9 ($46.75 in chips)
player 7 : Post Small Blind ($0.50)
player 9 : Post Big Blind ($1)
Dealing...
Dealt to natedogg [ Jc ]
Dealt to natedogg [ Js ]
player 1: Fold
player 2 : Fold
natedogg: Raise ($2)
player 5: Call ($2)
player 6: Call ($2)
player 7 : Call ($1.50)
player 9 : Call ($1)
*** FLOP *** : [ Qs Td 8h ]
player 7 : Check
player 9 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($1)
player 5: Fold
player 6: Call ($1)
player 7 : Fold
player 9 : Call ($1)
*** TURN *** : [ Qs Td 8h ] [ 9d ]
player 9 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($2)
player 6: Fold
player 9 : Call ($2)
*** RIVER *** : [ Qs Td 8h 9d ] [ Qd ]
player 9 : Check
natedogg: Bet ($2)
player 9 : Raise ($4)
natedogg: Call ($2)
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $24 | Rake: $1
Board: [ Qs Td 8h 9d Qd ]
player 1 didn't bet (folded)
player 2 didn't bet (folded)
natedogg lost $9 [ Jc Js ]
(a straight, eight to queen)
player 5 lost $2 (folded)
player 6 lost $3 (folded)
player 7 lost $2 (folded)
player 9 bet $9, collected $24, net +$15 (showed hand)
[ Kd 8d ] (a flush, king high)
Do you bet the river for value here or not? Obviously, looking at results this was a bad bet. But normally I think I would bet for value here. Feedback appreciated.
natedogg
I'd play it the same as you.
Even online you need to give your opponent credit for holding some kind of hand.
In he had queens up on the turn, he could not raise you because of the straight possibility. A flush draw was obviously another threat.
You need to be a heavy favorite in this situation and you were a small favorite at best.
You could have bet out on the river and folded to a raise. I don't think a typical 1/2 player would raise with just trip queens here.
Chris
I would certainly bet the river. Many players in this game will pay you off when they have a queen or something (and at this limit sometimes even with less!). I think a full-house is not likely, given the flop action (only option might be that he has 99); the only thing you have to fear is a backdoor flush.
When you got raised, you can be fairly sure that you're beat. I think against a normal 1/2 player you still have a call given the pot odds though, but if you know the player being non-tricky (and given the fact that he can read the board!), then you might have a fold, but it's still close IMO.
Regards, ME
playing that trash hand from that position...better tighten up...jmho..gl
Let's see. He is losing to AA KK QQ. What else? This is not a trash hand. I am impressed at your rock like comment, but is it profitable to toss JJ here?
True story from a $50 Paradise Tourney I played last night. I'd post it on the "best comeback" thread, but it's buried at the bottom by now. I've never seen anything like it.
It's Round 3 (Blinds 50-100) and I'm in the SB with KJo. I have only 310 chips at this point due to some marginial decisions on my part. After the turn, the board is A-T-X-X and I have all but 10 of my chips in the pot. River is a blank. I consider throwing mt last chips in and moving on to the next tourney, but for some reason I don't. It gets checked around, and I lose the hand.
OK, now it's still Round 3, and I'm down to 10 chips. TEN!!
I fold until I'm second to go and I get KK. I throw my last ten chips in, four people see the hand, and my pair holds up. Now I'm up to 40.
UTG I get 7d8d. Decent multiway hand, I'm in the blinds next, so I throw my chips in. Five people see the 7-7-X flop. Now I have 200.
I don't remember my BB hand, but I assume it got folded to me or something.
Next hand I'm in the SB. I get AJo, and raise all-in (Blinds 100-200 by now). I win this hand and well, and now I have 725 chips. I'm back in this thing!!
I come all the way back and take the chip lead heads up with 4200. I eventually lost to someone named "Kid Wonder" and only got second place, but it's still a good story!!
Anyone else ever finished in the money when starting a hand with 50 or less?
lol
As I have written already on this forum, I've experienced an amazing tournament run lately, and these have included a couple of amazing comebacks.
The most amazing one was when I had 95 chips left, posted 50 for small blind, and it got folded to the button who called (!?!). I had K7o, but hey, a button call ain't excactly a sign of strength? So I called, and tripled up my money when the board came 7-9-J-J-x and went on to WIN the tournament. From 45 chips to a tournament win, but it might not count as that great, since I was in the blinds on the hand I began the recovery...
Another tournament I remember, I must've been all-in in the blinds (not posting a full blind) at least 7 or 8 times surviving all (I didn't bust out that way), and there were cheers from the final two when I finally went! :-)
I also remember it because I folded 99 in small blind at the 1000/2000 level with just 100 chips left, because button called (if would've called if he'd raised, for the heads-up opportunity), and I figured at these limits, there was a very high possibility that I would be at least 2nd now (ok, probably not better than 2nd either, but I'm an eternal believer). Well, the BB even raised it up a thousand, but somehow, both survived with chips after the board came with, amongst other cards, a nine that would've landed me the pot and some breathing space...
lars
Yes, I was in the SB with $25 in a $10 T, 100-200 lvl and came back to win.
Who gives a shit
The pots at True poker 1-2 tables dont get raked before they reach $20 as far as i can see.
Even if their software is very irritating (you cant see your card at all times, you have to look at the players for the chat and it is slower than paradise) i think this is reason enough to try it out, if you play 1/2.
I think you should try it out before they alter their software, so they take the same rakes as Paradise.
Kim
This is an obvious troll. If it were genuine he would give a lot more detail about exactly what he is able to do.
He also knows he is safe from ever having to demonstrate this supposed ability, because nobody will ever put up $500,000 for him to do it. Even if they did, he could always just back out. So he's totally free to do what he has done - post yet another trolling, evidence-free Paradise-is-rigged post from a web-based email address under an anonymous nickname.
Those people taking this post at all seriously need a little more healthy scepticism.
PS natedogg: I don't know what you saw, but whatever it was, if it was a real problem it would be a glitch in the client, rather than in the actual system. I've had all manner of graphical problems with the client, including flops and hands where one of the cards has not appeared at all.
Chris
Everybody who takes the bet will of course meet me in person. And if PP takes their job serious they will go for it and.. they can afford it. However ; for those who do not understand what i mean.. I can predict the rivercard everyhand at any hold'em game after the turn-card is dealt and before!!!! any further action is taken. That means i will only bet or raise when i'm going for the nuts or i think that noone can beat my hand . That is very powerfull if i go for insight straights or flush. It's everybodys right to doubt what i'm saying but be sure : i will prove it soon ; with or without bet. But of course i will make some $$ anyway; it will just take a little longer if i have to take from the players.
What Motinka claims to be able to do, while difficult, is theoretically possible. If man can code something, man can decode something. If man can scramble something man can unscramble it. If man can encrypt something, man can decrypt it.
But perhaps what is most worrying to me is Paradise's silence on this serious matter.
absolutely... it is the silence in responding on Paradise Pokers end that is most troubling.
If you will notice, neither Paradise, Mr Malmuth nor Mr Sklansky ever respond to the collusion threads here or anywhere else. Why is that?
People, you just don't get it, i addressed this exact issue with Paradise as early as December 1999, the site has been compromised by both hackers and the owners both, stay away, the hammer will fall there shortly, Malmuth and Sklansky are up to their respective ears in wire fraud and attempt to conspire, they have been on notice for 18 months of the problems at Paradise Poker and have still collected a fat advertising check each and every month, please remember that we know where these two clowns live and i can assure you when the authorities move Mason and David will be hq'ed at the Clark County jail downtown LV.
I'm not sure that advertising dollars collected constitute conspiracy to defraud. I'll leave that up to the authorities. They may be afraid to comment because they could lose the advertising revenue if they truthfully respond to the collusion issue. If Paradise pulls their ads, I'd expect the flood gates to open and you won't be able to shut them up.
I don't think it would be good for anyone if S&M spent all day replying to hundreds of nonsense posts. We who have been to this forum and RGP for a few years have read the same thing over and over again, everytime without any kind of hard facts or evidence.
Neil Ross is a kook who has been warning about panamerican strike forces arresting the Paradise staff on several occasions.
If man can encrypt something, man can decrypt it.
Are you a mathematician? If so, you must have failed your discrete math class. Have you ever heard of one-way algorithms? If a message is encrypted using a very long key all the computers in the world networked together would not have the power to decrypt it, even though it would be theoretically possible.
If Motinka has figured out a way to break some of the modern encryption techniques then he could make much more money and gain far more respect if he published his findings.
This whole matter is total nonsense. You have to be a moron or Neal Ross (not necessarily mutually exclusive) to take it seriously.
I'm amazed at the willingness to believe this person's claim without the merest shred of evidence, and then to put the onus of proof on Paradise? Incredible.
How about this - one of the conspiracy theorists sends an email to motinka, and they can arrange to play heads-up at a play money table for ten hands.
Have motinka type the river card into chat after the turn, and then post the ten hand histories, or even the ten hand numbers here, and we could easily pull those hand histories ourselves.
Sheesh...
Good Idea.
Set up a time where we can all watch a play money game on Paradise. Montinka types in the river card before it appears.
Will never happen though, because Montika wants $$$ out of this.
So this is either fraud or blackmail. Take your pick. (Now why would anyone believe a fraud artist or a blackmailer?)
NT
Which of the two do expert Holdem players find gives them a better hourly return?
I would certainly vote for ring games. I make good money playing ring games, they're not too though, and at each level are (relative) fish. I'm not a very good tourney player though, so I could be a bit prejudiced.
Regards, ME
They both offer good potential.
I always play two games at the same time - 1 tourney and 1 ring.
I am about 1 BB per hour at ring games. After over 75 tourneys I am well up and place in the money about 1/2 the time. However, this might not be a big enough sample.
I usually play the low limit tourneys. The reason is you get some extremely bad players who get to fling around a lot of chips for $10 to $20 dollars.
The tourneys do require a different style of play and you need to know how to play short handed at the end. I have been heads up many times at the end with players you virtually give me a win simply because they fold a lot or only call when the big blind is at $1000.
I believe the rake is lower at tourneys, although I am not exactly sure how to compare.
I consider myself to be the usual 'ring game' player, but I've played a few tourneys every now and then upto the last month, where I've played lots of tourneys.
It's a small sample, but my last 30 $20 tournies has been something like 9 1sts, 7 2nds and 6 3rds. And that is not bragging really, because I can easily admit that I haven't excactly been beating the **** out of the low limit ring games. I've played Paradise for about four months, and made 3/4 of my $2,500 profit in the last three weeks, where tournament have been a MAJOR cash cow.
lars
Why have we not heard a response from any of the above listed to Motinka's challenge? It would certainly help all of us here who enjoy playing online to know that you are sure enough of the security at Paradise to take up this challenge. And for those of you who consider this all a waste of time, how can you continue to play online if there is even a SLIGHT chance of truth in his statements? (Or for you others who don't play online, why are you even reading these posts and slamming them?) Were I an owner of Paradise I would happily take his $50,000 challenge just to put all my loyal customers at ease. NOT taking the bet is equal to admitting that he just may have something here.
Did Motinka include a phone number? I will contact her/him immediately as soon as I can verify phone# and $50,000 in bank.
Why am I even replying to this stupidity?
Please add a new forum that focuses exclusively on internet fraud.
That way, all the conspiracy theorists would have their own special place to go.
Those of us who enjoy playing online could then actually have intelligent conversations concerning online play. This forum has seriously been degraded with the constant posts and allegations concerning internet fraud.
There are many good posters who play online who I do not see post here anymore and I suspect it has to do with the decline in the value of this forum.
Well thought out post.
Maybe all the shills for online poker can congregate there.
Maybe all the shills for online poker can congregate there.
I believe this comment may be evidence that you may not intend to use this board responsibly. You accuse us of being shills, but I'm just a schmuck that enjoys playing there and has managed to make a profit.
It would be nice to have an Internet Poker message board free from speculative arguments just as the other message boards are.
Don't put the conspiracy forum next to the "I love Paradise" forum link. It only takes one misclick and the "I love Paradise" people will find out the conspirators don't like PP and, in fact, think that it is the evil empire.
I think Neal Ross would be a good choice to start as lead conspirator, with his two monitoring devices already on PP mainframes and his ties to the justice community. Not to mention the Pan-American strike force waiting off the Costa Rican coast.
MS Sunshine (mr)
The conspiracy is that people like you believe that racketeering should be legal!
Hey, I think we should have a forum where we talk about money laundering, and organized criminal activity. Oh, we already do here! I truly would like to discuss the intricacies of moving cash say from Columbia to Chicago. Why don't I charge thousands of dollars to a Columbian credit card, but have my mailing address listed as a po box in Chicago! Then all we need is a company that uses FEDEX instead of a wire service to avoid the $10,000 reporting limit to IRS. Hey, we already have one here!
Please make educated replies as to other ways to launder money and contribute to organized criminal activity through the use of internet sites!
The conspiracy is that people like you believe that racketeering should be legal!
Hey, I think we should have a forum where we talk about money laundering, and organized criminal activity. Oh, we already do here! I truly would like to discuss the intricacies of moving cash say from Columbia to Chicago. Why don't I charge thousands of dollars to a Columbian credit card, but have my mailing address listed as a po box in Chicago! Then all we need is a company that uses FEDEX instead of a wire service to avoid the $10,000 reporting limit to IRS. Hey, we already have one here!
Please make educated replies as to other ways to launder money and contribute to organized criminal activity through the use of internet sites!
I'm among those that believe David and Mason should censor posts only very rarely, but your irresponsible slander against Paradise Poker sure makes a compelling case for it.
Slander only transpires when someone openly makes FALSE statements about other PEOPLE. Paradise owners will never reveal themselves voluntarily. No slander here. Actually, the truth is a total defense against slander.
How about avoiding the Columbian credit card altogether. Why not have an associate in Columbia or Mexico lose at the Heads up table large amounts of money to a designated screen name? The delivery of cash outs could still be $9,999.00 at a time. The checks are delivered by FEDEX, or whatever service Paradise uses. It beautiful.
I don't think that you can have an intelligent conversation at all. In order to do so, you must by definition be intelligent! I think they should add a dufus forum just for you.
Steve Badger posted on RGP last year that Paradise's distribution was skewed. Now he accepts advertizing from them and claims that they are straight up. Isn't that a coincidence?
Steve Badger posted on RGP last year that Paradise's distribution was skewed. Now he accepts advertizing from them and claims that they are straight up. Isn't that a coincidence?
Can you provide a cite for any such post(s)? I've done a search on google, and can find no posts where Badger makes such an assertion.
Google has it. It discusses the method by which the bias is by rank(this leads to a greater number of paired boards, and thus quads). The analysis was definitely Badgers'. Now his site advertizes for Paradise Poker, and he gives his method in an extensive article for beating the game.
Google has it. It discusses the method by which the bias is by rank(this leads to a greater number of paired boards, and thus quads). The analysis was definitely Badgers'. Now his site advertizes for Paradise Poker, and he gives his method in an extensive article for beating the game.
If "Google has it", then you should be able to pull the article up, copy the URL, and paste it on this forum. I've looked, and I can't find a post where Badger supports the theory of nonrandom deals.
I've done an advanced search for "Paradise" + "bias" and just "Paradise" with the author being Badger, and have not seen any such article. Could you please post a URL?
TIA
Listen you can't just ask for proof like that, especially when someone has posted something as blatant as that. If Badger has posted something like that (which of course he has not) then it would be on Google. Since it isn't (I looked too) now we are going to have to put up with a whole discussion on how the paradise hoodlums are controlling google too and using their underworld connections to censor it.
I didn't think so either, but I thought there might have been something I missed somewhere. Badger is highly opinionated (sometimes to a fault) but I've always felt he has been consistent in his stance on the randomness of the internet sites, which is why I was asking for a cite in this instance.
dk,
I haven't seen a single post by a conspiracy theorist, on this forum. I've seen many posts accusing people of being conspiracy theorists, though.
The only thing I want to discuss on this forum is the integrity of online poker. If you don't want to contribute, don't. Perhaps you can request a new forum for the blissfully ignorant so the rest of us can discuss important grown-up things.
Tom D
Thanks for your reply Tom D. No need to be hostile.
I think we are in violent agreement. My request was simply have a forum for those of us who play, enjoy, and win at online poker (the blissfully ignorant) and a forum for those who want to discuss its integrity (as you put it).
These ideas are different enough that they should have separate forums.
Also, it you don't think it has integrity, what "grown up things" are there to discuss?
Can you point out one single incident of cheating at PP by either a player(s) or PP. There are hundreds a posts a month concerning the integrity of PP but I have yet to see a single actual documented case (although this certainly doen't mean that it doesn't happen). Given that there are no actual scandals to point to - what the heck is there to constantly discuss since there is no new datapoints to analyze?
The only thing anyone can point to is the PlanetPoker scandal a few years ago - which is light years away as far as technology is concerned.
dk,
I don't know about the violent part, but we are in agreement, it appears. I would prefer you posted the things you want to discuss, and stop bothering annoying people who want to post what they want to discuss.
For the sake of this post, I'm going to assume you are not a shill for Paradise.
You wrote, "Can you point out one single incident of cheating at PP by either a player(s) or PP."
There is little doubt in my mind that something has been amiss at Paradise. The evidence is overwhelming. Can I prove it to you? No, I can't. I know that, and you know that. The evidence you require is not available, and you know that. A few hand histories prove absolutely nothing, and you know that. Yet, you keep asking for this evidence that does not exist everytime someone questions Paradise's integrity, insinuating that the failure to produce it is proof that there is no problem at Paradise.
If you seek the truth, why do you resort to trickery?
Tom D
Excellent post!Hey, until Paradise reveals themselves and opens the organization to full disclosure, nothing can be proved or disproved about them at all.
Please... don't answer me with a patent we don't address these issues answer. Why don't you take the challenge of Motinka and put an easy $50,000 in your pockets if what he is saying is NOT true? It would certainly do all of us online players a lot of good. I have invested a lot of hours and money in Paradise, and would like to continue playing there, but until I am satisfied with your answer I will be holding off. Im not meaning this as a threat, because I know you don't need MY little action. All I am asking is for you to take a stance to end this uncertainty once and for all. Eagerly awaiting your response.... (surfergal)
Paradise won't bite because it is either a fraud or blackmail. Either way dealing with a dishonest person.
Really? It sounds like a straight up offer to me. Why don't you ask him to lower the odds a little bit. Make him GIVE Paradise odds.Then what do you say?
Hello surfergal,
Thank you very much for your email, we have received it and we will respond back to you as soon as possible.
Sincerely, Paradise Poker
A one to one contact thread is not enough to prove anything. Instead, have Paradise send a global e-mail to all customers regarding the situation or have Paradise post directly at 2+2.
á
I've been playing online for a while now (on PP), and am just now starting to win back a little money (I'm still behind). I've learned to make a few little changes to the way I play in a live game. I'd like to know how the rest of you online winners change your game (if at all) for online play. I'm still having enough trouble that any advice would be appreciated. Online, I play only .50/1 and 1/2 right now, although I am a consistant winner at live games up to 10/20.
Natedogg said that you have play like a weak tight calling station.
Weak tight calling station is not exactly right.
Especially the calling-station part. That's completely wrong.
I don't like the word "weak" tight because that's not quite right either. I prefer the word "ultra-tight". "Weak" tight implies a reluctance to raise or take heat.
In general, to win on Paradise Poker, you have to do the following:
1. Have a HUGE bankroll. 300 BB is minimum and you should fully expect and plan on having a losing streak of 150 to 200 big bets without even a minor uptick. A straight drop. This WILL happen eventually so be ready for it and don't let it put you on tilt. Also, this only applies if you play a tight and steady game. If you play a high-variance style (raising with thin edges like with 88 from the big blind) you can expect probably DOUBLE the size of the downswing.
2. Play ultra-tight preflop. I'm talking so tight that most players will actually laugh out loud when I describe how tight it is. I'll let you speculate but whatever you're thinking right now, it's not tight enough.
3. Play position or die. If you loosen up in early position you will get destroyed. As tight as you play, you should play even tighter in the first three or four positions. Bottom line, DO NOT come in without a monster pair or AKo or AQs minimum. AJs is borderline and let the table's aggression level determine for you if that hand is playable. Of course you cannot play any hand against a raiser unless it is AK minimum. If someone raises, dump everything except AA, KK, QQ, AK(s), maybe AQ(s), and sometimes JJ or TT. I know many of you will think I am lost my mind to play this tight. You will learn the hard way I guess.
4. You need to adjust your blinds play. Do not defend the small blind. Give it up, the money is dead and your opponent is raising for a reason. Do not be overly tenacious with your big blind either. A8o and T7s and the like are NOT worth defending unless you are facing a late position raiser who you KNOW is capable of raising to pressure the blinds. There are very few of these players online. Be VERY reluctant to raise from the blind. I won't do it with at LEAST QQ or AK and sometimes not even AK.
5. Do not slowplay, ever. You MIGHT want to slowplay quads but I wouldn't recommend it. And if you EVER, even once, limp in with AA or KK from any position you should be shot.
6. Don't EVER show your hand, no matter how bad a beat you just took. Many players keep meticulous records of everything their opponents have ever done.
7. Don't ever bluff. Not even once. (this does not apply to heads up pots).
8. People are more aggressive online, so you should routinely induce a bluff by check-calling the river heads up when you have a hand like top pair weak kicker or middle pair.
9. Many of these opponents are unsophisticated and thus they LOVE to check-raise and/or slowplay with hands that shouldn't be. You will be amazed at how often people limp with aces. If everyone checks to you on the flop, you should only bet if you are willing to get checkraised, because it will happen almost every time. Conversely, if you want to checkraise the flop, you can count on the button coming through for you! It is rare for the flop to be checked around.
10. Jam the pot on a two-tone flop with top pair (or even MIDDLE pair if you can knock people out) after the button has raised. When a late-position player raises on a two-tone flop, he has a flush draw 90% of the time. Online players are in love with this move. The funny thing is, very few players will three-bet a flop with top pair or even two pair, so you can fairly safely use the free-card-raise yourself! It's true! lol
11. Some players are laughably timid. Identify these ones immediately because it will cost you money when you jam with two pair and they check-call you down with bottom set. They are out there. Against a normal player, you should be raising like a maniac when you actually have a hand, but try to identify those players who will almost never raise and will slow down with a set for three bets.
12. If someone is betting like they have aces, they have aces. It's true.
13. All of these tactics are of course subject to good ol' bendingmentation. If you can't adjust to changing game conditions, you will not be able to beat ANY poker game, much less an online poker game. The tactics I've outlined are for a TYPICAL Paradise Poker game from 1-2 to 5-10. That's what I have experience with.
good luck
natedogg
Very strong basic strategy for playing online.
I play almost identically preflop in early postion according to item number 4 (although I never considered it extremely tight).
I would take issue with step 7 about bluffing. I will bluff a lot against 2 players depending on the flop and how the hand played preflop. If you play tight and then come out very aggressive on the hands you do play, you have a better chance of bluffing. I especially like to bluff at a flop like K,rag,rag (ala Ciaffone's advice).
I also never ever slowplaying unless heads up, and even then rarely.
Perfect finish is that you need to adjust to the table.
Actually you're right about bluffing. I came across strongly against it because many people bluff too often and it's EASY to simply click "bet" when you want to bluff. A general rule not to bluff is best to follow, and then as you spot opportunities where a bluff can work, go for it. My rule against bluffing pertains more to the practice of trying to run people out of a pot when they obviously have SOMETHING.
K,rag,rag is also my favorite spot to bluff, especially if I've raised before the flop and I've got only the big blind and a limper in front of me.
An example of two good spots where I'll almost always bluff:
1. If I raise preflop and we see the flop four handed or less, I pretty much bet every time regardless of what comes. If it's three handed or heads up, I will bet 100% of the time.
2. If I have a mediocre hand such as weak top pair or middle pair in a shorthanded pot and somebody bets into me on the turn, I'll raise every time when I plan on calling down the river anyway. This is a very powerful play that is well-known to experts but it's hard to pull the trigger for some people.
Also, I will ram and jam on the flop in a multi-way pot with a big draw, but I tend to stay away from raising the turn on a semi-bluff (such as a straight or flush draw) when it's shorthanded. At that point, you will almost never push out even a middle pair, so call if you have odds and fold if you don't.
natedogg
natedogg,
Are you beating Paradise?
Tom D
Yes.
natedogg,
Good. I was afraid you were going to throw yourself off a bridge.
I agree with you about your strategy adjustments, but they are only valid at Paradise.
Tom D
Thanks for the detailed information. Some of your points are things I've already observed, but several of them have given me valuable insite into online play. Thanks again, and I'll keep you posted on my progress.
-Michael
Natedog:
How much more money can one make in a tightish rake game if you never bluff and never slowplay than one where your cards were always face up?
But thanks for junking the advice about never defending your blind.
1. I'm assuming you are implying that I might as well play with my cards faceup if I'm going to never slowplay and never bluff. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reason you don't ever have to bluff or slowplay is because of the Trap. The Trap is how you make all your money against weak players. What is the Trap? The Trap is this: "Maybe he's bluffing". You will get called by middle pair and overcalled by top pair weak kicker when you hold a big hand, because "maybe you're bluffing". Weak players are easily confused and never know where they stand. They often resort to the hope that you are bluffing a nd simply call you down. There's no reason to bluff and no reason to slow play. Just keep betting and getting your money in there with good hands.
2. It's not quite clear what you're saying but I think you mean that at one point I claimed you should never defend your blind and now I've changed my tune. If so, I was misunderstood. I never said "never" defend your blind. Obviously, with the right hand you can defend your blind against a raise. I think you should never defend your blind with weak cards just for the sake of defending. All this crap about getting 6:1 with your 64s is bad blinds play in my opinion. I think you could play with a nickname "my blind is up for grabs" and still beat the game. Be weak-tight in the blinds, ESPECIALLY the small blind.
natedogg
1. Slowplaying and Bluffing. If you're only suggesting that you should resort to these tricks less often against weak players, I agree. But even against weak players a blanket dictum that one should "never" do them is just hyperbole. On Paradise, I don't see that many weak players above $5-10 and damn few at $5-10. The problem is see isn't that players (myself included) slowplay and bluff at all, but that they slowplay and bluff without good card reading skills and a sense of timing. One situation I might agree with you concerns newly experienced low limit players that are becomming more comfortable with adjusting their play to the situation, overdoing it and assuming everyone else is also. Playing straightforwardly against these opponents is probably best too.
2. I recall you advising people to "not" defend their blinds, period. Anyway, routinely calling in the blinds with any two obviously is unprofitable, but the other extreme that you proposed originally just as obviously loses value. I'm not sure why you believe that defending the bb with 64s for 6-1 is "crap." I agree it's marginal, but so are a lot of hands. What about 76s? What about 8-1? In there some objective basis for your recommendations, or are you shooting from the hip? (Not that shooting from the hip is necessarily bad, but people are curious about reasons).
The key is your ability to read the players and your ability to adjust to the game. You will find all kinds of games online (loose/passive to tight/aggressive).
Make sure you know who is on tilt, who are the calling stations, who is aggressive. It is extremely easy to get off your game online and not follow the players (e.g., surf the net, watch T.V., etc.)
Do not make the mistake and assume the game is easy simply becuase it is online. I have come across some very very tough tables at PP at low limits. do not be afraid to switch around until you find the table that suits your style.
Look for players playing two tables - they are easier to bluff.
I find myself often playing an extremely agressive style online (far more agressive than I do live and more than recommended based on posts to the regular forums). The reason being is I usually have very good reads and I think players often over play thier hands online.
Good luck
Get away from the notion of an "online strategy." The games are tighter and tougher than the same limit in a casino, so focus on that.
Hi all,
About 2 years ago planet poker had the same problem. Someone figure out their shuffling program. There was a story done by CNN that uncovered it. Shortly after the story broke planet poker admitted to the problem. They refunded some money to the players that were taken advantage of.
I dont know if he can do what he says but in the story CNN did they said all shuffling program could be figured out. It would be just a matter of time before it happened again.
I have sent an e-mail to paradise reminding of what happened to planet poker.
I also believe this person should come clean and show everyone what he can do. The idea to meet a free money table sounds like a great idea.
It's ok. Motinka's post is a waste of bandwidth until he establishes credibility. I'm not saying that it's absolutely impossible, but at this time it's yet just another grandiose claim by an anonymous poster on an internet site. One of millions.
I dont know if he can do what he says but in the story CNN did they said all shuffling program could be figured out. It would be just a matter of time before it happened again.
Shufflers are based on random number generators. They generate sequences of numbers that appear to be "random" because their cycles are extremely long and they show no visible patterns. It is possible to create a poor quality rng but there have been publicly available algorithms for good ones for almost 40 years.
RNGs require a seed to start them. If you seed 2 of the same RNGs with the same number they will produce exactly the same results. Seeds are normally real-world non-predictable numbers like the time of day in milliseconds. Since it takes an indeterminite amount of time to play a hand (it is based on human beings) each shuffle could be seeded with the current time. Even more likely, Paradise and others seed and produce "decks" asynchronously with the games that are using the "decks". This is analogous to a "deck server". How could anyone recognize patterns? With many hundreds of games going on simultaneously they would not even be looking at sequential shuffles (not that they could do anything with sequential shuffles).
Quoting sources like CNN (although Im not even sure if the quote is accurate) does not impress me. The papers and news organizations pander to morons and water down everything they report.
Just to get a feel for this, find a calculator with a rnd or ran function (many have them), it will produce a number between 0 and 1. Multiple the number by 100 if it is 3 digits, 1000 if it is 4, etc... (get rid of the decimal places), divide by 53 and find the remainder. It will give you a number between 1 and 52. Pull that card from a deck (1 is AS, 2 is 2S, ... 52 is KC). Try this for 10, 20, 1000, 100000 cards. See if you notice a pattern. Do it by eye, enter results in a spreadsheet, whatever. Tough to crack? Piece of cake compared to what the online sites can easily do.
Anyone ten year old can post crap on a forum like this, rather than doing his homework. That does not mean Paradise need bother replying and giveing it credibility.
The CNN program you mention might be what gave 'Monika' the idea of generating this hoax. (Certainly Monika's claim would be more plausable if CNN had not said that 'it is only a matter of time before it happens again')
Hello, i would be interested to get your opinion about the following hand:
Player A is a maniac; he raise almost everything and never fold until river Player B is me... Player C : first time i play against him... A raise UTG B, in middle position with a pair of T, reraise C, just on the left side of B, call Flop: 2s,7h,9c A bet B raise C call A call Turn 9h A bet Here is my first question :what must B do??? B call C raise A call Second question: and now??? B call River 3s A check, B check C bet A fold B call...and loose against T9 Thanks for your comments
Look it would be a lot easier if you would use names or just post the hand history. This makes my head spin.
I like your play very much pre-flop and on the flop. You should definately try and isolate the maniac.
On the turn, I think you need to raise A. A is still very likely beat and you want to make it extremely expensive for overcards to call.
Once C raises I would be done with the hand as you are almost certainly behind with only 2 outs.
Even though you lost here, you gained very valuable info on C - He plays way too lose pre-flop, will probably defend his blinds, and is not really very agressive (didn't pop you back with top pair on the flop).
At noon today PST, I logged onto Paradise Poker and took a count of all the tables for ring game play.
Noted Average Pot Size and Hands Per Hour listed...
I then went to look at their website for rake taken out of each pot, this does NOT include 1 on 1 play, nor Tournament Play, nor does it take into account fluctuations throughout the day in players/ action.
After some math i came up with $6113.80 Paradise is collecting in rake per hour if all things were to remain constant....
Calculating (i hope)on the LOW side, (20 hours per day/ 365 days per year) i will not be precise due to normal fluctuations in business, Paradise Poker is a $44 million dollar a year business.
Draw your own conclusions from this, however do you THINK they would risk this income to collusion or faulty software?
-Ray
I dont think they are doing anything wrong. I think someone who wants to cheat will always find a way to.
No risk exists at all. The owners are completely anonymous.
Someone in Atlantic City, keeping track of automated keno tickets, hit a 12 spot then 11 out of 12 within 20 tickets. The casino didn't have to pay and the kid said he had figured the RNG out. Citi bank lost $30 million a couple of years ago.
There is whole list of programs that interact with the PP software that can be hacked. When Motinka is talking of other sites and being able to hack them it,more likely, if this is true, that he has hacked these and not PP's software, but what's the difference to a player that been taken advantage of. My bet would be some kind of packet sniffing.
MS Sunshine (mr)
I agree that if someone were to dedicate the time and effort, anything can be hacked..
My point was, PP is a LARGE money maker, without needing to cheat players for it. Due to this fact, i would find it amazing and bad business if they weren't working as hard as possible to insure that their business was unthreatened...
And your suggestion would be the logical way someone could gain knowledge of cards to come, etc..
Interestingly, after doing the math, table by table of the rake taken per hour, it has caused me to reevaluate which games are profitable... Mid Limit (for paradise 3-6/5-10) Hi Lo split games, appear to be a ridiculous investment, due to lack of hands per hour and rake taken out/ vs a split pot...
Also 15-30 rakes the same as 20-40 but the pots are half the size on average for my sample (small and very unscientific, but it gives an idea). I leave this too open to the individual and how he/she wishes to react to the knowledge that an average of 200-250 dollars will disappear from the table each and every hour..
-Ray..
"My point was, PP is a LARGE money maker, without needing to cheat players for it. Due to this fact, i would find it amazing and bad business if they weren't working as hard as possible to insure that their business was unthreatened..."
The foolishness of this argument has been proven over and over with real life examples. Human greed knows no limits. Poor judgement is everywhere you look. Greed and poor judgement get together quite often.
I agree. It is in the best interest of paradise poker to run a safe fair game for all. The amount of money they make in rake, far surpasses any cardroom anywhere. Paradise needs to take whatever means necessary to make their programs hacker free and monitor all games for collusion. We, as customers, need to feel that our money is being bet in the safeest possible environment. Paradise has more at stake then any individual player and thus more to lose from unfair play.
Does anyone know of any online poker sites that offer a Macintosh interface? I've only beenable to find PC compatible sites.
TIA
If you have a java engine enabled you should be able to play on any java based site. Try: cherrypoker.com (real money cash limit holdem) bigbetpoker.com (play money tournament pot-limit holdem)
HI all MY name is Celtic.Tiger many of you will know me. Originally I lost v big on paradise. Now I am getting it back slowly, grinding it back. I also play planet I believe roy cook to be doin a good job.,and mostly true poker which I really like. I gave up playing Highlands as a friend of mine I believe has been tring to get his money out of them for 50 days. He has threatend to post here.So I have lost all respect for MR Brunson. Im fairly sure that pp is str8.Since I started playing properly I have been cashing out reg. So I would hazzard a guess that paradise closely monitors the regular winners. If you fold when the river is not in ur favour and raise when it is im sure paradise would smell a rat. Winning internet players are certainly not going to come on here and tell people how win and beat them. Online play and Live are very different. I know many online winners. The only advice I can give is this. Make a plan and stick to it. Never make a bad bet. The biggest problem I see is players with top pair against 4 players on the river. Top pair is good against 1 or 2 players. Some 1 has a bigger hand otherwise they are not on the river. Players get married to aces Recognise when you are on a loosing streak. If you are on a loosing streak only move off the flop if u have 2 pair ,trips ,4 to flush or str8. Do this until you go hot then loosen up. I know it is tempting to bet with ak and a on the flop but when your on a loosing streak you just have to play 1/2 and grit your teeth. Watch the winners closely,Have a bank roll of 300 bb. Dont be tempted to play 10/20 with the 500 dollars you won playing 2/4,3/6 .The winning 10/20 players will clean you out. Yes you may get lucky once or twice but thats it. Play your way through the ranks.
Celtic
Sorry some more points i thought of. Get a damn good firewall.Either sygate from sygate.com or zonealarm. There are a lot of winning casino players online. So what you have got is a casino where the winners from all round the world playing each other. Thats a tough place to play.
Celtic
Hello,
Our apologies for the delay in responding. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to address your concerns. This public post is either a hoax or a fraud by an anonymous poster who wishes to add themselves to the list of baseless and unfounded credibility attacks.
Please see http://www.paradisepoker.com/rng.html which discusses our random-number generation and the research and effort we have put into ensuring that the cards are dealt not only fairly but in a completely non-deterministic manner. This means that there is NO WAY that someone can predict what cards are coming next.
All of the communications between the Paradise Poker server in Costa Rica and the client program running on your computer are encrypted using the internationally accepted industry standard SSLv3/TLSv1 encryption algorithm. Furthermore, each player's cards are sent exclusively to that particular player's computer. None of the other computers know what your hidden cards are, thus preventing an opponent from hacking their client software to determine your cards.
We take great pride in our security issues and have gone to great lengths to ensure that we are offering the fairest and most secure online poker site on the Internet.
We strongly feel that responding to him in a public forum would simply encourage his slanderous behavior and others like him.
If you have any further questions or concerns please let us know.
Sincerely,
Winston Paradise Poker Security
Hello,
I can hear what you say, and read what you write, but why not take the easy $50,000 and call him on it? Until you do there will be speculation and questions all over the forums. I am NOT computer smart, but I can't agree that there is "NO WAY that someone can predict what cards are coming next." To me a statement like that rings of arrogance. If hackers can get into the pentagon, major banks, universities, etc., it is very hard for me to believe that the security at Paradise Poker is impenetrable. To say "NO WAY" means little to me. I would feel better if you would just call him on it, prove yourself, take the $50,000 and have a freeroll tournament for all the customers who continued to believe in you ( and feel free to exclude me for doubting you). I really don't think that your reasoning about responding to him would "encourage his slanderous behavior and others like him" is accurate. Perhaps if it was just words, but this guy apparently is willing to risk a large amount of money on it, and you don't seem to be willing to call his bluff, if that is what it is. However, he has called you down... now show your hand.
Awaiting your reply, surfergal
What sort of audience do you suppose hoax perpetrators cater to? Any chance that it's people that say things like "If hackers can get into the pentagon, major banks, universities, etc., it is very hard for me to believe that the security at Paradise Poker is impenetrable?"
Let me give you an equally good reason to not be suspicious. I can prove beyond all doubt that this guy (assuming it isn't you?) is a complete fraud, and if I'm wrong I'll pay you $50,000.
Of course, you'll first have to put up half a mil ...
I accept your offer. Post the bank that you want me to deposit the money.
.
I received a well thought out, well written email from paradise asking me NOT to post any more of their communications here without their expressed permission, and I will follow their wishes. Anyone who wants to try to understand their feelings on this issue will have to email them directly.
Not only will they not reveal who they are, but they now want commerical responses to inquiries kept private, too? I sure bet that they want the list of paid posters (people paid to post positive responses) kept secret as well.
because they asked me to keep my correspondence private, I will respect their wishes, as much as I disagree with their whole stance on this issue...
Would you want someone posting private e-mail that you send to a public forum? It's bad etiquette, and it may be illegal as well.
Posting letters sent to me from an illegitimate, racketeering company is illegal? Thats like saying Sammy The Bull Gravano is a honest man!
Laws don't change based on your opinion of the wronged party. And that's one of the worst analogies I've ever heard.
It sounds like you are a lawyer. Why would any attorney risk disbarrment for participation in felonious activity? (interstate gambling over phone lines)
1) I'm not a lawyer.
2) I'm Canadian. U.S. laws don't apply.
3) If you're referring to the RICO Act, that only applies to sports betting, according to recent U.S. court decisions.
Dribble Dribble Dribble. Piss off :{
...depending on what part of the world you are from anyway.
á
This is called bad publicity...or is it just that? I guess one will never know...or will they?
-á
S&M have mentioned that you need at least 7 to 1 odds on the flop (factoring in implied odds)to draw to a gut shot. But what odds do you need on the turn to continue with only a gut shot?
46 to 4 playing holdem. 44 to 4 playing omaha.
Strictly, you need more than 42 to 4 or 10.5 to 1 for HE (42 miss and 4 hit so you lose 42 x one = 42 and win 4 x 10.5 = 42 to break even every 46 hands)
Gutshots are the greatest thing on earth and you should always draw to them and sometimes raise.
They are the born tilt makers.
Some naysayers might ask for about 9-1 or bit more on the turn depending on the situation and implied odds estimations, but they are just naysayers, no bother.
Always draw to gutshots and worry not of pairs on the board or flush potentials.
And read RGP daily.
And have fun.
Yeah that's absolutely right Ms. Information.
Always draw to gutshots, especially with a 4 flush board and almost ALWAYS draw when the board is comprised of two pair (more so when the 2 pairs are both big cards ie: AKAK, QQKK, KKJJ, etc...). You just cannot fold, I repeat you CANNOT FOLD your gutshot draws when these situations arise, it's just too good.
You'll really get'em with these moves.
:)
I'm surprised that players here haven't evinced much interest in the fastest way to improve hourly rates - finding a way to get the online casinos to reduce the rake. By the numerous calculations I've seen in various posts, the larger online casinos are making an absolute killing - a much larger off-the-top profit than B&M casinos can hope to make.
The 'standard' (I do love how the casinos call the rake structure 'standard' - as if it would be 'real' poker were the rake to be lower) rake has not been set at 5%/$3 max because that's what the casinos need to make money; it's 5%/$3 max because we'll put up with it and no other online casino has challenged it (how many of you would switch to, say, UltimateBet (I've no connection with them and have only played on the play tables to check the software out - no volume there at all on the cash tables), in the next few weeks if you heard that they'd switched to 5%/$2.50 max or 5%/$2 max. I'd switch in a second.
As for what players can do to effect this reduction in rake, I'm not sure. We're pretty tough to organize, but if many Paradise players got together and started bombarding various other casinos with emails claiming we'd switch if the rake were lowered - or if they bombarded Paradise with emails saying they've quit playing on Fridays (or altogether) until rakes came down- it might produce interesting results... This is one form of collusion (or counter-collusion, if you take the view that the casinos are colluding to keep the rake artificially high) that I'm happy to be a part of.
Or we can take our current course, which is either not thinking about the rake at all, not believing we can do anything about it, or just waiting/hoping until natural market forces bring the rake down.
Any suggestions?
Do the math. A 20% reduction in rake will make a tremendous effect on your return (or stem your losses).
I hear you and agree. I also have a good way to improve results. That is, never, ever play Q10 offsuit in any position, in any game, in any casino - online or B&M.
The rake will drop. It is an inevitable result of increased competition. The competitors will never be able to collude to keep the rake down given the nature of online competition (among market players).
I posted this about a few months ago, but got little response to it. I have no financial interest in this web site ( I do not work for them). It's called www.bubbaspoker.com. They are only running play money right now.
But they claim they will have a MAXIMUM $1 RAKE when they start real money. It's Java based so no download is needed. I actually like having a download because it's so slow to log on each time without a downloaded client program.
Hopefully, this site and others will have a $1 maximum rake soon for the online community. Then we have to hope they don't issue rubber checks or no checks!!
But I totally agree. A small rake like $1 would allow the losers (most players 95%+) to lose much slower and the winners to win more in the long run.
======= from their web site regarding rake ======
RAKE:
Bubba's Poker takes a rake from a hand under the following circumstances. In full player games if the pot is less than $20, no rake is deducted. If the pot is $20 or over, a $1 rake is deducted. The maximum rake is $1.
Rake schedules are subject to change.
Hello all. I've been reading a couple of erroneous(sp) that I feel as though I should correct. It has to do with whether online variance is higher or lower than the variance (per hour) at a live casino. A few posters have stated that the online variance should be lower. This is not the case. Let me explain.
It is a well known fact (I'm assuming that all conditions equal) that more hands per hour are dealt online vs live casino. (If one was to play at 2 tables at once it certainly is true). I am going to assume playing at only 1 table online vs 1 table at a casino. I will assume that online you play more hands per hour. (My guess is online you play roughly 60+ Hands/Hr vs about 30-40 hands/hr at a live casino). That would mean that your bankroll will go up and down faster online vs a live casino. Playing for 2 hours online would be equivalent to playing 3 or more hours at a live casino. That means that your Bankroll will go through the fluctuations of "normal (live casino)" play at a faster rate. That means that you win rate will take bigger fluctuations in the course of an hour online vs at a casino. Well, in statistics, these fluctuations are called variance. (The spread of win rate/hr) will take on a wider range of values because you are playing at a faster rate.
The error in previous posts refers to the "n" that is used to calculate the variance. A few have stated (in error) that n is a function of # of hands played. This is not correct. The "n" that is used in the variance calculation refers to the number of measurements used in your sample not in the number of hands played/hr or hands played.
Hope this clears things up.
Don
Hi, i was just checking all the comments to my post. I do not want discuss all the points. Just 1 !! question. What do you do if you think you are bluffed ??? You call or raise and take the pot !! The only reason not to call is of course you think chances are i'm not bluffing. However; i know ( as a fact) that PP is checking their software like crazy right now. I offered a bet ( no blackmail at all ) and everybody out there can take own conclusion. I got some very nice offer for less $$ allready and i'm thinking about it. CU at the tables
Where do you play live games? I like to travel.
I'm not a pokerplayer .. but never know maybe i try
Please go away. I enjoy reading this forum but your ridiculous posts reduce the value of what all people have to say here.
Paradise is ignoring you because you have nothing. And unfortunately we can't, because any idiot can post here.
I enjoy the forum. Posters like you, however, disturb any rational man. You seek to post nothing but bootlicking posts which try to make this unregulated industry something that it is not: legitimate. Please quit whining.
What do you enjoy about this forum?
If the industry is not legit, what the hell is there to discuss?
Play or do not play - that is your choice. Why constantly discuss all the reasons you do not play?
I don't like pro basketball - I think it is an inherently bad sport. However, I don't go around to basketball forums and post what a stupid sport it is. Makes no sense to do so. Why would I want to waste my time and annoy those you like to talk about the game?
Is it enjoyable to you to discuss how it is not legit? What value is there in that? What does that have to do with poker?
I hardly doubt the other 2+2 forums would put up with the crap that is posted here.
Try it - put a post like this in medium stakes: you - "B&M casinos cheat players" them - "do you have any proof?" You respond - "Well no, but there must be cheating!!" they respond - "Get the hell out of here"
I think you need a better hobby. Also, how is Fred whining? Sounds like he just wants to discuss poker. By definition, isn't that what all you conspiracy theorists do - whine about how the industry is not legit?
What do you have against pro basketball?
Don't like the flow of the game in general.
All the stoppage at the end drives me nuts - enough so that I can't watch it.
I like college ball much better.
lol well, I hate golf... hit the ball and walk, hit the ball and walk....
At least gaming commissions let us know who the corporate officers are. Does the Nevada Gaming Commission have any proof when they ban individuals?(Answer, no) dk dumb kid.......I enjoy putting clowns like you on tilt.
Any time you want to play - look me up.
I go under the name B-Slap. I play every night from $2-$4 to $5-$10 (except thursdays when I play a live tourney).
Unless a company is public, what makes you think you have a right to know who the corporate officers are?
The secretary of state office will have filings of all corporations articles of incorporation.:public or private. This information is public information available to anyone, unless of course you are not a company, and are owned by drug dealing, La Cosa Nostra members.
Any time you want to play 10-20 up to 100-200 let me know. I'll make reservations in Atlantic City at the Taj, and fly in to meet you.
Simply untrue.
While states have differing laws, it is common practice to keep both the officers and the ownership of a private company private.
In fact, Casino's in Las Vegas can even keep its officer's private (provided they do not make decisions related to gaming) and this is common practice among the smaller casinos.
I am not an expert in this topic, but the investment banker who sits in the office across from me is. He is an expert in both corporate structures, corporate law, and the gaming industry. The info. above is what he explained to me.
I will be at the Orleans and 4 Queens tourneys if you care to play. My guess is you wouldn't because your mom thinks your too young to travel alone. I would also guess if we played 100 - 200 you would have maybe enough money for one bet (small bet).
Your friend is wrong. He shoould be disbarred. Oh, he's not a lawyer. He is an "investment banker". That means that he is a stock broker. He is wrong , too. What is his name. The NASD might have an interest in his lack of fiduciary knowledge.
Hello Fellow Internet Players. Today i am renewing my offer of $100,000 to the individual (s) that have the knowledge and knowhow to jam Paradise Poker's servers, you CANNOT get into any legal hassle here for doing it, Paradise Poker is conducting an illegal business and they are defrauding the poker community of MILLIONS of dollars each and every month. Yesterday the FBI announced broad and sweeping arrests and indictments for a wide array of internet scams and frauds. SKLANSKY and MALMUTH you have 48 hours to remove PERMANENTLY all advertising for Paradise Poker from this site, failure to do so will necessitate my filing a complaint against you with the US Attorney office for Southern New Jersey. The two of you are a total disgrace to the poker community, you have aided and abetted in the largest poker fraud ever.
Unbelievable. Inform everybody how this turns out.
Stop posting about it,just do it!
He will...he just needs the stake.
-á
do it to pokerspot too them
Hello fellow internet players, check out the action at Pokerspot, you might find it a refreshing change from Paradise.
You are the best Neal. P.S.If you dont't mind me asking,how old are you?
dob-5/23/48
Neal, Happy belated Birthday
MS Sunshine (ms&mr)
heelo again fellow players, you need to ask yourself why no other reports (except isolated incidents) have surfaced about software rigging, bots, hacking concerning all other internet poker sites. Yes there have been cash flow problems with Pokerspot and Dragon was closed down but no one has ever questioned the integrity of any other site that I know of. Yes, i have been the biggest detractor of Paradise and i have been working diligently in closing them down. The legal process is a slow one but it will come to fruition soon. Paradise's US operatives such as SKLANSKY and MALMUTH will be punished for their criminality. How many reports of shennanigans at Paradise do you need to read and hear about before you take action. There have been people running around New Jersey casinos offering to sell software that will allow you to see ALL dealt cards at Paradise for $3500 guranteed refund if not satisfied. Get oot of the denial stage and face the reality, Paradise Poker is a criminal operation has been since day one.
Why don't you buy that software and demonstrate it for us? That should achieve your objective.
This is a question i have for you neal. You was the one who put pokerspot down the most. Now they are the best place in the world. What's going on. You change your mind that fast. I wont play there until they pay all the money they still owe me. I dont understand what has changed for you to praise them so much.
Most players who have been owed money have received all or most of what was due them, the site can only payout the funds it has available, yes, i was on their back and questioned whether anyone would get paid, they have proved their good intentions to me. I play there because i have not uncovered any evidence of collusion, hacking or rigged software.
What about Ultimatebet? why don't you Play there. I like it. Play there. You see more and more players there everyday
Paradise Poker has been draining money out of the poker community at a staggering rate, this is money that is not being recycled and has had the effect of causing a severe downturn in live action worldwide, i warned about this phenomenon over a year ago. Even if Paradise was on the level which it is not the danger of putting B & M poker out of business exists.
I am in danger of losing my mind. What action should i take?
Neal;
I tried Pokerspot only for a couple sessions and then the payout problems began so I stopped. I was happy to finally receive a check from them for a complete cashout and will consider returning there to play again. I like Paradise but I think it's important to support other sites so that possibly the rakes can be brought down through increased competition. However, your constant bashing of Paradise and drum beating for Pokerspot only gives me doubts about Pokerspot. You sound like a fanatic.
I am beating no drums for Pokerspot, only pointing out that Pokerspot, Planet and Delta have not been the object of any user complaints regarding rigged software or player collusion. I believe in the integrity of the previously mentioned sites. There ownership is known and the play is as honest as you would experience in a live game. On the other hand Paradise Poker is funded by mob money with a dummy front that responds to no one. How many players did Paradise Poker send to the WSOP this year, don't you think they could have affordegd to send at least one. My point is that Paradise Poker is out to steal every penny it can before the sxxx hits the fan. By playing there you are supporting organized crime and taking money out of the worlwide poker pot.
A couple points.
1) Why should a site like Planet be any more shielded from player collusion since by definition this is something that takes place between players - not the site? Any two players can talk on a cell phone regardless of which site they play on.
2) I think the rigged dealing theory is largely a function of the high hands observed online, the improbable suckouts - due perhaps to higher hands per hour dealt - and poorer 'play any hand' play? I started playing online at Planet and immediately noted to myself that there were a lot of quads and straight flushes made - and gutshots on the river. While not completely disallowing for the possibility that the online shuffling may be stacked, I don't feel that Paradise is any more likely to be doing this than other sites.
3) I'd be curious to hear why you think the software at Pokerspot is better than other sites, which I believe you stated in one of your posts? It appears primitive to me.
How many times have we heard paradise not paying anybody?How many factual times has someone either cracked the random generator or hacked in and could see all cards?(it happened at highlands and planet)I do not work for paradise.I think highlands had the best customer service,fastest payouts, and best customer promos.I think ultimatebet.com has the best software.However Paradise has remained the front runner of online poker because they are good -if not great in almost every area in online poker.Paradise has few weaknesses.The only socalled weakness is they have no recognizable professionals endorsing their site.Planet has caro,cooke, and highlands has brunson,and ultimatebet has hellmouth,duke,hamilton,nyguen(?),and about 5 others.Paradise has none and for that matter neither does pokerspot.Pokerspot has good software but has the worst customer service online and payouts arent worth talking about anymore.My point is paradise has been and will remain the best in online poker because they a good in almost every field.Until another site comes with a lower rake paradise will not be dethroned.
PokerSpot software is full of bugs - small and serious, including dealing exactly the same cards on two tables in their tournaments.
Didn't Paradise disclose their ownership in their post about a year ago on RGP, naming Linda Seaton (if I remember correctly) as the owner.
I have 9d2d in the SB. At this stage the SB is 2/3 of the BB, it is folded to me, what should I do?
Derrick
The very next round I am dealt Qc-9c, and it is folded to me in the SB. The SB at this level is 3/5 of the BB. The BB is the early chip leader, meaning to me he is willing to play a hand. What is your move considering you are likely to be called.
Derrick
On the first round, I will probably toss in the nickel and fold to a raise. If, I have a decent read on the BB (e.g., he has folded every hand so far), I might raise.
On the second round, I will throw in the dime, and fold to a raise. No value in raising if you are sure he will defend.
After reading your other posts, I think you want to at least call because you can probably outplay the BB heads up.
Either way, I don't think it is a critical decision at this point in the tourney.
More difficult is the Q,9 in the sb at the 200/400 level and up. There, it is critical you have a good read and understand the implications of the chip counts.
Round 1: Fold. Raise only if the BB is very weak in defending his blinds, and even then, you have to bail if you get any heat back. In a regular ring game, you can raise to steal the blinds, but when 8 people fold in a Paradise tourney at level 1, it means they all had total crap. This increases significantly the overall quality of the cards in the BB. You're almost certainly beat here. Plus, consider that you can't win much, but can lose a lot, and that's only going to damage your position at the table.
Round 2: Raise. Play hard if you catch any piece of the flop.
Note that I strongly disagree with dk's advice above. You must either raise or fold. You can't limp as the SB unless you hold a monster and are desperate for the BB to stay. Giving the BB a free ride is a disaster.
I would normally agree with a raise or fold. However, to call in both places will cost a grand total of $15 dollars - totally insignificant in this tourney. You are getting 5 to 1 and 4 to 1 on your calls.
If you do catch something and you are good, you can outplay your opponent and possibily win a significant amount.
As I pointed out, the story changes significantly at the higher limits where calling can lead to a disaster.
I would call and see the flop. Q9s is a slightly better then average hand but I wouldn't raise with it against the chip leader.
Ken Poklitar
If the BB is the type to raise, then fold. Otherwise call and be prepared to fold the flop unless you hit something nice.
Ken Poklitar
fold 92
call with 9Qs.
P.S I think raising with 9Qs at level 2 or 3 against anybody who is willing to play is a mistake you can do without.
There must be an increase in sunspot activity. There is a high correlation between sunspots and Neal Ross's hold on reality. He has been calling open trips on six street with one pair/no low draw in $20-40 stud 8/better. We have noted an increase in his posting on 2+2 poker forum. Additional support personnal have been needed at several poker sites to handle the increase in his e-mails. We expect everything to return to normal in a few weeks. No need to be alarmed. Paradise Poker servers are not, we repeat not, in any danger. Neal, take more of the blue pills.
MS Sunshine (mr)
you are my SUNSHINE, i seem to recall that i won 400 in the game while you my dear lost over 200, anytime anyplace i will play you (except paradise).
Please don't forget to invite me. I love friendly games. LOL!
:>)
Gene (holdemdude)
Hello fellow players, Even if you choose to believe in mothing i say and even if you are a winning internet poker player who does not cheat; the sheer power that Paradise Poker is exerting over internet poker is not healthy for the poker community as a whole. Their refusal to reveal who and what is behind Paradise Poker, their refusal to address legitimate player concerns is unhealthy to the worldwide poker community. As far as i know almost every other internet poker site puts something back into the poker community by employing people who not only play poker themsevles but in many instances hold integral positions within the poker hierrarchy. The point i am making here is that Paradise Poker is not part of the poker food chain, it is eating our food.
Play every where...Play Planet...Play Paradise....Play everywhere......oh...and raise with K-10o in late position regardless of the action in front of you. Then you will win millions, and never have to work again!
Hi everybody.
Let's take a little poll. I think we might all learn something if we share our thoughts on this matter.
What % of all low limit LIVE game limit poker players are consistent winners?
What % of players in these games HONESTLY BELIEVE that they are consistent winners?
What % of these player CLAIM to be consistent winners?
What % of all lower limit INTERNET poker players are consistent winners?
What % BELIEVE they are consistent winners?
What % CLAIM they are consistent winners?
What % of all of the people who claim that internet poker games are fixed or otherwise somehow fraudulent are LOSING players?
What % of losing players COULD become winning players if they took the steps necessary to achieve success?
What % of all low limit LIVE game limit poker players are consistent winners?
5%
What % of players in these games HONESTLY BELIEVE that they are consistent winners?
35%
What % of these player CLAIM to be consistent winners? 65%
What % of all lower limit INTERNET poker players are consistent winners?
3%
What % BELIEVE they are consistent winners?
5%
What % CLAIM they are consistent winners?
65%
What % of all of the people who claim that internet poker games are fixed or otherwise somehow fraudulent are LOSING players?
90%
What % of losing players COULD become winning players if they took the steps necessary to achieve success?
90%
The bottom line is that all of those losing players can't deny the fact that they lose when they play online. They know exactly how much they've bought in for and how much is in thier account.
It is easier to live in denial when people play in live games. Of course they will remember the heaters when they won 50BB in no time. But they will forget the steady march of chips out of their stack all the other times.
These live game 'winners' (and they really don't win at all) play online and, surprise surprise, they lose there too. But now they can't deny that they are losing - not to themselves anyway. They get angry and upset and they come on here and flame away about how the sites must be rigged.
I submit this question to those who win in live games and lose online. How do you know you win? Can you prove it to yourself? Are you SURE you win?
If there is any doubt whatsoever then you probably are a losing live game player too.
I was a little liberal with my percentage for how many people could win if they took the necessary steps.
For some, 'necessary steps' means a lot more than it does for others. Some would probably need to seek therapy and learn to control their emotions. Some others would probably need to recontruct the way they view the world. IE those who believe that everything happens for a reason, guided by emotions and not logic, belive in fate or destiny, etc. I guess it is not realistic to think that most of these players could become winners because they are too hard wired to lose and that will never change.
Some other people, sadly, are simply not intelligent enough to win. You would think that after seeing the same situations come up time and again that they would be able to learn to beat even low limit games, but they can't.
Realistically, the % of people that are losers now that COULD EVER become winners is 15%.
mmm a bit of a radical rethink there Pro.
Would you also like to rethink your estimates of the number of players who believe online Poker is fixed and who are losers?
Maybe I've got this wrong, but you say that 97% of online players are losers, but only 90% of those who believe online Poker is fixed are losers. So a winner is more than 3 times likely to think online Poker is fixed than a loser?
Wow, good point.
I was just throwing out ball park figures and did not appreciate the implications of what my estimates meant.
Ok, I revise that. 99.5 - 99.9 % of those who think PP is somehow rigged are losing players.
I was trying to be conservative in my estimate but I see that I went too far.
My experience is that there is no correlation between losing and claiming the site to be rigged. This concerns the theory that hands are dealt in a non-random fashion. The one person I know who have put forward such theories is the one person I know who have played enough hours to actually have a qualified opinion. I am not sure exactly how much he has won but it is definately a high five digit $ amount. Of course that doesn't neccesarily mean that he is right, but I am quite sure that the estimate that more than 99 percent of the people thinking that PP is rigged is incorrect.
TT
You're a complete moron. It's ludicrous to state that 3% of low limit internet players are losers. Assuming that a group of players all stick to one limit, about 1/3 of them win. That's how poker WORKS, if someone loses it's because someone else is winning (minus the rake).
Chris
nt
Chris, I think you are wrong about a third being winning players. In an unraked game, possibly (in such games, even 80% could be, assuming two total maniacs), but 1/3, consistant winners in a raked game??
There is an old poker adage which goes: In long run, 1% of the players take care of 90% of the money.
Tough game.
lars
I think you are the moron.
The estimate is that 5% of low limit players in live games are consistent winners. I will assume that the % of online players that win is lower since the games seem to be somewhat tougher, with a few really good players, a lot of mediocre/bad players, and a few horrible players.
I believe that, online, there are a very very few people scooping all the money and a lot of people donating.
live, 3% win 25 % think they win 50 % say they win
online 1% wins 1% thinks they win 50% say they win
in live games maybe up to 10% could learn to win. Online only 1% can win
Those who believe that online poker is fixed include the FBI, and IRS. Two of yur favorite organizations.
All in all I hear what you are saying and agree with it. Most people believe that they are winners and are not. Online it is much harder to lie to yourself. This is not quite the case with me and I just can't beat online poker. I have always considered myself a better strategist than a people reader. I could be wrong here, but I don't think so. I thoroughly understand poker strategy and have iron clad discipline, this has been proven by the fact that I have a very good tournament record as well as an excellent live game record. I think if I were better at reading opponents that I would be one of the very best players both in tournaments and live play instead of being where I am at, which is slightly underneath the best in both fields. This I honestly believe is my shortcoming as a poker player, but poker has been very good to me. Therefore, I should do real good online and that hasn't been the case.
This is perplexing, I do know good players with proven track records that are doing good playing online. I know others that have equally good track records that have done extremely poor online. Logic would dictate that the ones that have done good are better strategists and the one's that have done poorly are better people readers. I know this isn't true in my case. I put too much time online for this to be a bad run, so here lies the reason for my perplexion. I do know this, I live in Vegas, so I believe that I will opt for playing live poker.
What limits did you play?
I ask this question because I honestly believe the lower limits and middle limits can be beaten, although I think that at the highest level some very very good players play.
Regards, ME
I have been playing poker online for as long as it has been around and I can comfortably say the exact opposite of what you are saying. I had never played poker in Vegas until I thought I knew what I was doing having learned it online. I must give off strong tells because whether it is 4/8 or 30/60 I get my ass kicked playing at Bellagio or Mirage. I have booked 1 winning session (barely) in 16 attempts over the last year. Hopeless.
The funny thing is that I am financing my trips to Vegas with checks from paradise poker. I have a solid bankroll there and every 2 months I draw a check that pays for airfare, hotel and bankroll and lots of shopping for the wife. I have read every book that is out there and my log book at home is more than 40 pages of notes on different players that I have gone up against.
I have eight binders full with hand histories of every hand I have ever played online and some of them are so scratched up with red pen they are hardly legible.
You could say I am a successful scholar of the online game, for sure I take it very seriously. All I can say from my experience is that it is a much different game than what I found playing live. It might just be that learning to play online so much has taken away the poker face that maybe I never had.
I accept that what I have learned is much different than the game that people play for real.
Ed,
I am in the same situation as you. I do well in live play 15-30 thru 30-60. I keep meticulous records and have done very well in 5 years of almost full-time play.
I CAN NOT beat the Paradise games at any limit, but show a modest profit in their satellite tourneys.
Spence, you say you are just the opposite.
I have been trying to figure out why or what the differences are between these two types of players-the ones who win online/lose live and the ones who win live/lose online?
One posting that I read a while ago *claimed* to be from a former Paradise employee who said that hands were designed to go to the river and that certain accounts indexed to be tight were given better pre-flop hands to induce more action.
Now, I don't know if this is true or not but it would explain why players like Ed and myself fall into the "can't win online" category. I've often FANTASIZED about having some of my on;ine opponents in a live game where their 7-1 gutshots don't come in every hand...
and Spence, I'm not trying to belittle your online success you may have discovered something that some of us have not.
Either of you guys have any comments??
I posted a message a while back that was quite specific about my online strategy. It is nothing magical, just simple basic strategy based on maximizing your opportunities. This comes from a combination of things and every little bit helps. I can say with certainty that there is no one thing that makes all the difference. Knowing your opponents specifically and their styles is a big part of it for me. Going back over my play to see where I likely could have picked up another bet or two (or saved them) plays a big part of it too.
When you contrast this against pros who sit down in live games against a group of strangers and do well, you can see what a huge difference there must be between the two types of games.
I wonder what percentage of people out there, sitting down to play online poker for the first time in their lives, are certain they can beat this game? My guess is over 90% think that they've just found an endless supply of money for themselves because they know poker well enough to do pretty well against their buddies once every month or two and that online poker must just be full of idiots who know nothing of the game. That is very far from the reality of the situation.
For players like Ed and others who can beat the live game but not the online game, I would consider the things that I do well online as the things that make it difficult for them. Also, just the opposite holds true for skills they have developed in live games that just don't translate to the online environment.
Example: on my last visit to Vegas, I was sitting at a table playing against a well-known pro (his picture and column appear every month in Cardplayer magazine). I've already said I think I must give off strong live tells. On one particular hand, on the turn I had top pair weak kicker and a draw to the nut flush. I bet and he stared at me for 5 seconds with a look that seemed to peer right through me. Then he raised and I think my cards may have hit the muck before he even finished betting. Call it pure intimidation? It never happens to me online.
I don't know with what name Ed plays online so I don't know if I've even played against him nor what style I would use. But surely it is different than if we were playing live and I knew who he was.
Ed,
Do you have 40 pages of notes on other players? Do you have 8 binders of hand histories with comments? Probably not. So what is your edge against people who do? When the board is Axxx, and somebody is raising your bet with AK on the turn, do you know whether this guy must have a set (then fold) or is capable to bluff with inside straight draw (then re-raise)? I bet that a guy with 40 pages of notes knows the answer with 99% certainty.
Actually, I have a data base in Excel with many lines of notes on the playing tendancies of a few hundred players.
When I play poker I take it very seriously. I couldn't imagine why anybody wouldn't do this. If you recall in a previous post I stated, "I have 6000 hand histories that I analyzed." What in the world do you think I was saving all these hand histories for?
The e-mail box that handles Highlands cashout queries is returning mail,saying that it is full up.
Has anyone had problems getting paid?
I have made 6 cashouts from highlands this year and have had cheques to my door in 2 days every time.
i to have received several cashouts from highlands without problem.try their customer support @1-800-245-0553 and i'm sure whatever is wrong,they will fix for you.this is the most trustworthy poker site online,if not the busiest.
A delivery came today when I was out - I assume it was a check from Highlands.
It seems like some of the posts on this forum are getting a little out of hand. I think the best way to control it is just not to respond to them and to focus on the posts that contain the worthwhile poker information.
Tahnks, Mason
sounds like a good idea
.
Thanks, Roger
That seems to be the wisest thing to do and I was wasting my time anyway.
Some people may want to notice the phrase 'worthwhile poker information'.
If you wish people to refrain from responding to posts labeling them crooks and a cheats then perhaps you could do something to limit the use of your forum for this purpose. The handful of posters (conceivably just one) who are trashing this forum are doing so not because people are fueling the fire but because they can do so anonymously under multiple aliases. Some kind of nickname registration and log-in procedure would go a long way.
Also, a BB that brings the currently responded to thread to the top would be nice.
very true...a good post.
I DISAGREE.. if you or David or Paradise would address out concerns, answer out questions, many of the garbage posts would be eliminated.
"I DISAGREE.. if you or David or Paradise would address out concerns, answer out questions, many of the garbage posts would be eliminated."
Or if they just deleted anything written by pokerbratt.
Mr. Malmuth, it appears that you stopped responding to any post in this forum long ago.
The collusion/cheating topic keeps coming up. There is little-to-no intelligent response from the online "winners" to the concerns and questions posed by many participants here. It would be refreshing to have the foremost experts weigh in with their opinions and stimulate some "meaningful" dialogue.
You (our hosts) have let it get to this by your silence and now you want to just shut it off? Is the real concern and suspicion by the loyal participants of your forum so inane that you cannot respond to even the most clearly stated posts?
If you have a conflict of interest making it uncomfortable for you to enter into a reasonable discussion, then just say so. Your laissez-faire management of the Internet Poker forum is disturbing.
Chip, Mr. Malmulth does not owe you an explanation about anything. This is HIS forum. He put at risk the capitol and as a business owner, you should be able to appreciate and respect that. He is the one who selects what topics are discussed and it seems that he has very clearly stated his intentions when he asked for 'worthwhile poker information'.
I also think it’s disrespectful of you to keep pumping him for private information on personal business matters. He's not hiding anything, it's simply not prudent or wise to discuss financial and sensitive issues in public. As a business owner, you should be able to understand and respect that. In other words, it's none of your business.
You've made some good points and I think your intentions are probably good. We listened. I think everyone who plays online now always looks over their shoulder (even though they probably shouldn't). But it does seem that you are on a mission from God and I doubt that anything I say can change that, so I'm happy to respect Mason's wishes and I now give up.
I think it's very clear however that you can no longer claim ignorance about the wishes of the people who own this website and I make one last appeal to you to respect those wishes, and the wishes of others like me who tune in hoping to find some nugget of information that we can use to improve our game. Please let us discuss these things in a forum that was established specifically for that propose and not the purpose of discussing possibilities better left to be archived away in the X-Files.
stocksnaces,
Mason was talking about you.
Tom D
Yes. If you read my messages again you will see that I'm am aware of that and acknowledge as much in both posts under this title.
This is also a good opportunity to again reiterate the phrase ‘worthwhile poker content’ to clearly put to rest the question of what the content of this forum is intended to be.
Since I spend virtually no time on the Internet playing poker, I didn't have much to add to this forum. But I will be watching it more closely and hopefully we can get it cleaned up in a few days.
Chip Breaker,
Questions regarding the legitimacy of online poker in general (and of particular sites as well) were previously discussed at immense length on this forum (apparently a good while before you started reading and posting here). Also discussed in-depth was collusion, both in general and in specific hypothetical scenarios. David Sklansky personally contributed a great deal to all of the above discussions. I would think if you would search the archives (probably last summer/fall) you would see that our hosts have not simply ignored these topics on this forum, and you should find some material relevant to your concerns.
Periodically someone new comes along and opens it all up again. I don't blame our hosts for not getting involved in what are essentially the same very lengthy discussions all over again--and again, etc.,--after all, they need time to play poker too;-)
My suggestion is to spend some time searching and reading the archives if you wish to know what David Sklansky had to say about these and related issues.
If you can't post the link please let me know how you searched for those posts so I can review them too. I'd of course be interested in Mr Sklansky's input to last years discussion..if that is all we get.
I would be happy to tell you how to search, but I don't know myself. I was involved in many of the threads at the time--that's how I know of them.
Perhaps you could experiment with the Archives until you find out how to search (or just start reading through them--(a lot of material;-)), or perhaps you could place a post on the Other Topics Forum requesting assistance in how to do an Archive search for keywords, if such a thing is possible (if you find out please let me know;-). Sorry I couldn't be of more help. The material is there; it's just a matter of finding and reading it.
Hate to flame this up again, but this was a strange hand I was involved in last week on Paradise Poker.
2-4 HE. I was on the table for about 2 hours, then in a matter of minutes, 3 new players joined the table, all with small buy-ins (around $50). For this hand, they are UTG, player 2 seats to his left (2EP), and Button.
I was in the BB with Kh 5h, full table. UTG calls, fold, 2EP raises, all fold to Button who calls, SB folds, I call (mistake?). UTG then re-raises! 2EP re-raises in turn, all call. I should have mucked, but just what-the-heck called. 4 see the flop.
Flop [4s Jc Td].
I check, UTG bets, 2EP raises, Button calls, I muck, UTG re-raises, all call.
Turn [4s Jc Td] 7c
UTG bets, all call.
River [4s Jc Td 7c] Jh
All check. UTG shows 3c 3d, and wins the pot! Other 2 don't show their hands.
How could have UTG come out firing on every round except the river with a hand like that? He didn't even have a straight or flush draw, just a 2-outer. It sure seemed suspicious to me.
UTG and 2EP stuck around for only about 15 minutes after that hand, then left within minutes of each other. They did not play like maniacs during the rest of their stay. Button stayed maybe a half hour longer and left after losing all his buy-in.
I submitted this hand to PP personnel, and requested they get back to me regarding their conclusions. I haven't heard from them since.
Neko
I think I'm missing something...who was colluding on this hand?
You are a dribbling moron who calls K5hh to re-raises. Just another loser who thinks PP is full of cheaters and colluders. I have played about 35,000 hands on PP and have never been convinced I am up against cheats. Bring it on anyway, cos when I am in a hand, I have total gas. Collude versus me, the rock? Come get some.
This is why I rarely worry about collusion although I'm sure there are some sharp, money making teams out there.
Just the fact that someone would even think this was collusion shows me that most people with the tools to collude wouldn't even know how to collude properly.
Just my 2 cents.
-ActionBob
Completely lost me. P.S.Calling with K5s mistake?No,i would have called a capped bet cold.
If they had been colluding -- intelligently -- then one of them would have bet, the others folded and you'd have no reason to be suspicious. As for them not showing, you can find out what their hands were from the history.
Also, 3-betting junk isn't that uncommon at low limit.
The reason you haven't heard from PP is that this is obviously not collusion. Why cap it out with 33 and a weaker hand than 33?
UTG was just being a moron. I would guess that EP held AKs, with a backdoor flush draw, and that the button held an open-ender (possibly even a gutshot).
Chris
I know my play was pretty bad on this hand, but that was not the point of the post. At least the two Chris' had some positive comments.
I would not have thought anything more about this hand except that both UTG and 2EP entered and left the game at about the same time, and neither played so wildly after this hand - in fact they played like rocks afterwards.
But it could be that all this talk about collusion and PP not being on the up and up has me seeing things that aren't there.
Myself personally, I enjoy playing there, and am only slightly above break even after about 150 hours of play.
Papio
how come most post,knock pp,evertime i've rqstd cashout,i recd,my $ in a timley manner,playng on the net,to me,is ok,remember;just go w the flow,when its goin gd mve up to higher games,if go lower
how come most post,knock pp,evertime i've rqstd cashout,i recd,my $ in a timley manner,playng on the net,to me,is ok,remember;just go w the flow,when its goin gd mve up to higher games,if not go lower
nt
I know I can recall the details of every bad beat for hours after they occur. How about when those same fish shower their chips on you?
Here are two quick examples. The hand numbers were 77815762 and 77816461. Please feel free to critique my play (it is inevitable that someone will). Serious Question: Would any of you folded in Hand One after the repeated raising? I was VERY close to doing so but I was hot and determined not to be run out of the pot over a couple of insane bets.
Hand One (5/10 Holdem)
Our hero is in midposition with 8Jclubs. SB, BB, Call, Fold, Raise, I call (its hard to explain why and I don't do it as a rule but I had position on the raiser and expectations of a lot of callers - - you can't take advantage of others mistakes if you play too few hands). There are a total of 6 of us seeing the flop.
The dream flop is AK duece of beautiful green clubs. Not quite the nut flush but I've got a big smile (I know I was out of line calling a preflop raise).
A bet and raise (from the original raiser) before it gets to me. I smooth call. 2 folds, 4 of us left.
Turn is a disaster. King of god damn hearts. Bet, call, call (me), raise (damn - - not the original raiser), call, call. I still feel confident, but I am concerned.
River is another dangerous card. The Jack of Diamonds. It now seems even more possible that one of the likely sets I was up against have filled up. Bet Fold Call (me) Raise (same player from the turn) Fold Call (me). I really thought I was a gone goose.
He shows King spades and Ten clubs. Preflop he called the raise cold. The pot is $227 (I was happy to pay PP their $3 drop fee).
Next hand is even better (since it is stress free).
I am the SB with Ace ten unsuited. 7 callers, no raises so I limp for an extra $3 even though I generally hate ace ten.
Flop is 7 10 10 with 2 hearts. I bet out as the SB. Fold Fold Call Raise Fold Fold Raise(me) Fold Call. I feel good that I have probably gotten the gut shot draws to fold - - its hard to do and they cause an awful lot of bad beats. There is now just me and the raiser.
Turn is a ten. I love this game. I bet out again and he calls. What could he have? A pocket pair presumably. Not too big I figure since there is no way he thinks I have the case ten.
River: Its another 7. The Board is 10 10 10 7 7. I bet out and he calls. Now, are you as surprised as I am to find out he had 9 J offsuit. I still have a smile on my face. This pot is "only" $109.
If I am going to blame the software for my bad beats, who do I thank for the easy money?
Se ya at the tables.
Ok how about this one:
A 3-6 game, many limpers, practically no preflop raising.
I get Ks 9h on the button and limp.
Flop: 44K
I bet, some callers
Turn: 7
I bet one caller
River: 4
I bet one caller, he doesn't have anything.
VERY NEXT HAND:
I get Ks 9h again. Same two cards. Im wondering about a software bug.
Flop: KK7
I bet, two callers
Turn 9
I have the stone cold nuts and I bet. I am raised and reraised. ok, cap.
River 8
I bet, they both call.
One turns over TT, other has AK.
Weirdness, indeed.
David "Sometimes you kick. Sometimes you get kicked." Ottosen
all that proves is that you are a loose player
...that loose bad players can get lucky without "knowing what cards are coming".
n/t
Game is 20-40. I have AK in middle position. Fold, fold, raise - i re-raise, everybody folds, except SB (2.5 bets cold call), and the original raiser. Flop Kxx. SB bet, call, i raise, SB - re-raise, fold, i call. Turn is another small card. SB - checks, I bet, SB raises, I call. River is 10. SB bets, I call. Now guess what he has (it's 20-40, not 2-4 game)?
He shows KTs (no flush draws anywhere). So he called 3 bets cold (almost) before flop, then made 3 bets on the flop. Then check raised the turn, and then hit his kicker on the river.
Is Paradise rigged?
I was playing in this 5-10 game where this guy OBVIOUSLY was colluding and probably even knew what the cards were. He probably works for Paradise as a shill to just prey upon unsuspecting fools who don't realize he has a cracked version of the software. Check this out.
I'm holding AQ and raise from early position. Some clown calls me with J8 of clubs, and flops a flush! How the hell could he play that way unless he knew what was coming!!!!!!!!! He cold called my raise with J8. Unbelievable.
Then, it gets even worse. The board pairs on the turn. The board is AKK2. This same clown calls a raise on the turn in a multi-way pot with the non-nut flush and calls ANOTHER raise on the river when a fourth broadway card shows up!
Any idiot would realize that all this raising means there's a full house out there, especially with a board like AKK2J. But NOOOOOOOOOOOOO... he calls all the way and rakes a huge pot against trip kings. How could he stay in there with that kind of heat unless he knew his hand was good because of cheating? Of course, I folded my worthless ace long before.
I was a little suspicious but then only a few minutes later, the guy makes quads! I'm sorry, but that is just too suspicious to me. I'm sure he had some way of knowing what the cards were or something. Paradise is a SCAM!!!!!!
:)
natedogg
Obviously a bad call pre-flop but once the guy flops a flush why would he fold? I would almost never fold a flush simply because the board has a pair on it. Obviously if there is two pair on the board that is a different situation but with just one pair I would call as well.
People never remember when someone cold calls three bets before flop, calling all the way to the river amid several raises and quietly mucks when someone only shows top pair. When your starting hands are of consistent higher quality than your opponents, the only way they can win a pot is by getting lucky and bad beat you.
Your comments drool of sarcasm and are meant to show how pathetic people really are. They will believe anything, and think your post is bonafide. What a bunch of dribbling morons. If you didn't type it someone else would have. The thing that annoys me the most is that the guy who had j8cc made his hand yet managed to avoid raising at any opportunity. I mean, we all take beats. I had AQdd v K9cc flop Q 9d X. He smoothed preflop raise, and capped out the flop with me! Shaking in my boots I checked the 5d turn (Nut flush draw/top pair betso kicker). He checks behind. :D River 9o. He makes besto trips I lose muck cards. I was fuming, it was 5-Ten; above my normal 2-4 play. I counted his river outs. 2 nines, 2 offsuit Kings. 4 outs out of 45. He wins one in 11. Thats not too horrible you know. Its still a beat. But so what? Do I think he knows what is coming because he capped out flop? No. I saw a man bet/3 bet a buy heads up on the river with J high with flush down/paired board.
There are morons on PP.
It is not rigged.
You will take savage beats.
Enjoy them, they tell you that you were ahead.
I hardly ever inflict beats, because I am always ahead, or have massive outs available. Enjoy taking tough beats, it means you are a good player IMHO. ie you are in pots when you are ahead.
Are you referring to my post below about "Proof that Paradise is Honest"? I assume so.
I don't quite understand what you are trying to say because it's not clearly worded. However, I was merely having some fun by redescribing the same hand from the loser's point of view and showing that it's all in the interpretation.
It's true that someone could read that post and confuse it with a bonafide rant against Paradise, which I was NOT doing. So hopefully this will clear it up. I was JOKING.
Also, I don't like the blanket categorization of bad poker players as "morons". They in fact can be very intelligent and interesting people who simply don't know how to play poker well. I've been guilty of that kind of categorization myself and I'm trying to get over it.
natedogg
Good point. Morons does not equal bad poker player. But I have found that good players are intelligent people capable of making decent decisions in all areas of life. And many poor players are real morons, who live their lives in suoerstition and hunches/much like "feeling a backdoor flush is coming". I know you were joking, that's why I pointed out your sarcasm. I am sure some thought you were serious.
If this moronic logic is how you prove to yourself that Paradise is honest, then no wonder you think so.
"I cold called a raise with J8 suited and won! I limp with AT off and win again!! Good enough for me".
Good god man, it proves nothing, only that you probably lose a lot more than you win.
I agree it proves nothing and that the first hand was pure luck and that attack dog undoubtedly looses if he makes such calls, however, a couple of the posts here have criticized his limp in the second hand. From the sb with A-T and no raise and 6 callers I will always call with A-T. Would you have folded in this situation?
Not necessarily. The complexion of the table makes a difference. AT is the bottom of my Ax list and I don't really want 6 or 7 other players if an Ace falls. I know it is very common to see players limp with A9-A2 in loose fishy games, but if another Ace is out there, there is still a chance that I'm dominated while holding AT. His flop is exactly what you hope for with that hand. It almost sounds like a fabricated wet dream.
How beatable are the Planet Poker games (5-10 thru 10-20)?? Personally, despite everyone's opposing views about Paradise, it's clear that some of the best players in the world play there and if you don't admit it you're deluding yourselves.
I don't hear much about Planet on this forum so how soft are the games there?
I don't know how soft the Planet $5/10 through $10/20 games are, but I do know that very few of the "World's best players" and that many weak players do play there.
As for Paradise, I think $2/4 is hard, considering the limit, while $5/10 and $8/16 aren't so much tougher than they are supposed to be considering that it's 2.5 and 4 times the bigger limits. I haven't played much $10/20, but I gather that it's very beatable too.
There are a great players at $20/40, and $15/30 used to be tough too when they limited the action at the top two limits to only two tables each. The thing is, these players could be beating $30/60 and many probably even $80/160 in live games. I think at least $15/30 is close as for how low these poker greats are willing to go play online poker, but obviously they are, for the probable reasons:
*Getting used to online poker, as it will probably someday offer even higher limits. It's probably exciting, even for these, to try out anyway.
*They games are, but not to such an extent as in the earlier days, 'juicy'.
*They get twice to 2.5 times the number of hands, making online $20/40 interesting even for a winning $80/160 when he can play two tables, leave the car at home and order chinese. :-)
It is also often overlooked that despite the fact that many great players play $20/40, there is a reason for this. And while $.5/1 through at least $5/10 is, like Andreas would say, 'the usual mixture between decent players and clowns', the big limits are often blessed by the much welcome sight of tilters and 'First-time-on-Paradise-haven't-heard-of-a-bankroll-goes-through-all-limits-in-one-night-leaves-$600-at-Ł20/40' guys.
They tourneys are nice, though, aren't they?
lars
Hello.
I play a lot at planet. Mainly because it's there I have my bankroll. I also seem to tilt more easily at paradise. Dunno why that is.
Anyway, I've been playing limits 0.25/0.5 to 3/6 and have been doing fairly well (not sensational but I'm still learning.). Lately the games seem to have become tougher, but there are always a couple of live ones...
I have a friend who's playing 5-10 and it seems to be the same there, a bunch of decent players and some fish...
I have no clue about limits above 5-10.
Sincerly, Andreas
At 10-20 and 20-40, Planet has a much higher concentration of good players than Paradise. So IMO it is tougher to beat those games at Planet than at Paradise.
I recently got down to heads up in a $5 hold'em tourney and my opponent disconnected at that moment. Well, I'm not proud of what I did next. I took full advantage like a frat boy on a passed out sorority girl. My opponent had a fairly substantial lead going in and by the time they were back online, I was way up. It felt wrong, but when I disconnect, nobody slows down to wait for me. It was a hollow victory for sure, but did i break any rules of ettiquette here? What would you guys have done?
I would have taken pictures to show her after she came to.
It is part of the game. To paraphrase Caro, "disconnects are just a bad beat".
I think you need to take advantage of it as your opponents almost certainly will and you need to play on a level playing field.
Two days ago, I got disconnected short-stacked with 5 players to go. I am sure I am done. Get the email 30 minutes later when I connect again saying I got third. I made it through at least 10 more hands. No clue how I got that lucky.
I guess you now know which camp you're in.
anyone selling this program?
Is the part of the reason that some players can win live but not online that online players are more aggressive?
example: if I open raise get 2 or 3 callers, I will automatically bet a flop with an Ace or a K even if they have not helped me. I would have difficulty doing this live as I might give a tell at some point. Similarly, if I have 2 overcards on an 8 high flop and the player beside me bets - I will raise a lot of the time.
A click of the mouse is so much easier than picking up chips and putting them in the pot.
Is it possible that some live players have a strategy that relies on passive play to give it an edge and when this is removed they become losers?
Excellent points.
In live play, passive games are so easy to beat and that's what many people play in their local rooms. The transition to online play presents a much different challenge and if you're not used to dealing with that kind of play then you could have problems. That's probably another reason, among several, that the variance is greater with online play.
Another reason I think that people have trouble making the transition is because successful play involves a great many unconscious habits and these habits do not always smoothly carry over to online play. But that is a topic for another day.
Hi All,
What's the best time of the day (PST) and best days of the week to pay on Paradise Poker low limits .50-1 to 3-6? I've noticed tables get extremely tighter around 12-4am... Thanks!
- Johnny
What's the best time of the day (PST) and best days of the week to pay on Paradise Poker low limits .50-1 to 3-6? I've noticed tables get extremely tighter around 12-4am... Thanks!
As always, YMMV, but if I had to choose, I would opt for Fri/Sat from about 5-6 pm 'til about midnight. Also, it's been pointed out before that the beginning of the month is usually better than the end.
I would opt for Fri/Sat from about 5-6 pm 'til about midnight.
Lets see, is that 5-6 pm in Moscow, Tokyo, LA, NY or Stockholm? Seems like it should be good most anytime.
Try to figure out when the colluders are sleeping and play then.
Lets see, is that 5-6 pm in Moscow, Tokyo, LA, NY or Stockholm? Seems like it should be good most anytime.
For the benefit of those readers who may not be in the US, the original poster had specified (and I included this part in the quoted section) PST, which stands for Pacific Standard Time, so I guess the answer to your question would be LA.
Try to figure out when the colluders are sleeping and play then.
Try to figure out when the paranoiacs are online - they're easy to tilt.
My point, for the benefit of readers that missed it, is that with the site being attended by people from all over the world the best time could be anytime the fish get off work and start playing.
You are only paranoid if they aren't really out to get you.
At the low limits you might want to play at times when it is evening where people who live places that 1) don't have legal poker and/or 2) don't play limit poker.
Talbot, could you narrow that down a little? What time zone would those people be in that dont have legal poker and limit poker available?
Thanks........jim
Hi all,
Is software for analyzing Paradise Poker hand histories legal? Online gambling is "technically" illegal, so I'm wondering if a program used for gambling would be illegal. Does a disclaimer like "21 and over to order" need to appear? Or is this software legal for children since the software doesn't allow one to gamble directly. If an age limit is required, would it vary by state?
Thanks all!
- Tony
So Paradise misses me. It wants me back with the promise of a 15% buy-in bonus up to $90. As I figure it a $600 buy-in gets me $690 less 5% or maybe $660 total. The catch is I must play 50 hands before cashing out, an easy feat. The only problem is the old chalk horse, sure thing, can't miss proposition. Can I 100% depend on getting my $600 back? OK, 98%? I sure won't lose it playing because I won't go above 1/2 and a buck with a $60 bankroll. It sounds like a freeroll.
how many of you play at paradise(or other internet) and in between hands read 2+2...i am addicted to this...gl
I find reading 2+2 really gets you into the "poker" mood. Of course watching Rounders does that too! ;)
I do but it is very bad form.
I easily get bored. Try extremely hard not to play and surf. However, I am doing it as I type this letter.
Me too, but for other reasons. If I dont have something running on the internet behind PP's program, my internet connection is way less reliable. I have yet to be disconnected with 2+2 on in the background. Might as well be bouncing around this site between hands.
How do you watch how every player plays every hand and make your notes AND surf? I find it difficult to win every session even with full concentration. You guys must be VERY good.
I do not win when I am not fully concentrating. At best I am breakeven.
it's ironic to be visiting a site which says pay attention and varyyour play, but it just gets toooo boring after a few rounds and ....oh well, now when i am playing 2 games, surfing 2+2, watching a bet g on tv, and telling the wife what to fix for dinner, then i am giving my money away, but it's fun...gl
Yes! Most of the time I'm surfing, reading, watching a movie, studying a technical book... something. I would go nuts if I had to pay too much attention to the game and the players. Playing online just wouldn't be worth it.
I realize this cuts my win rate down, but you know, there are more important things than just playing poker and I spend too much time on line as it is.
my guess from this and your other posts you are a huge overall winner...gl
Oh boy. I hope I don't give the impression that I'm just rolling over the game without even putting much effort into it and that's the way it can be for anyone. No! I am not a huge winner. My success online is good, but not great and I play mostly because I enjoy it. There are others who are doing much better than I and more power to them. There are many others who need to invest a great deal more time, effort and discipline before they are to the point where they can even break even.
Having invested a great amount of time in learning the game of poker, I continue to study diligently but I draw the line and refuse to watch every single hand, keep detailed notes on my opponents and devote all my web time to beating the internet game. Much of the time, I don’t even know who most of my opponents are. I could probably do significantly better, but I have a life.
Your mileage may vary.
Good luck!
..am I playing poorly or am I just the unluckiest person on earth ? Anyways a couple weeks ago I deposited $100 at Planet and proceeded to play S&M strategy to the best of my ability and at first all was well. I got up to $234 playing tight and aggressive poker and then.. the bottom fell out. Check out these hand histories and tell me how I could have played different
Hand# my hand 10529905 KsQc 10529944 AcKs 10675968 KsKh 10696901 JcJs 10697129 TdJd 10697658 AhQh 10703204 AsJh 10704337 KcQs 10730564 Td9h 10730764 AsQc 10731411 AhJd
After this carnage I was down to $65 and I gave up and cashed out. Also, in between these playable preflop hands. I received an unbeliveable amount of unplayable trash hands. Have I had the bad run from hell or what? Anyways, considering that their graphics and connections are light years better than Planet. I think I'll stick to Paradise or just give up online entirely.
This has probably been posted before but I haven't seen it. It was posted on RGP recently though.
http://softwaredev.earthweb.com/sdtech/article/0,,12065_616221,00.html
Absentmindely put my name in the subject line, sorry.
I guess I win the idiot poster of the day award.
This appears to be very legitimate research into the whole RNG controversy that has been simmering regarding online poker.
I would like to see some responses from those who have expertise in programming and math as to the content and veracity of the article found at this URL.
http://softwaredev.earthweb.com/sdtech/article/0,,12065_616221_1,00.html
It should be pointed out that this is from 1999 and the programers alerted the people who made the RNG in use. Still, it shows that such things are possible. I too would like to hear from some experts on this.
Any algorhythm can be cracked given time.
-á
That is not true. Don't say things like that without knowing what you're talking about.
Chris
Is over 6 years experience in software testing (hence, working closely with developers) enough for me to make that statement? If not, I'll back out.
-á
So you're claiming that you could crack, in the time necessary to make use of the information, a properly seeded, properly implemented random generator?
Chris
I'll put it to you another way:
Is it any more complex that public key or SSL encryption? If it is, we're in trouble.
-á
I assume you mean "If it isnt..."
So you know people who can crack SSL in real time, then?
Chris
Not personally but any encryption method can be cracked given enough time.
-á
Alright, here's an encryption method based on your name where all lowercase letters with only straight lines are ONE and all letters with curves are FIVE. y(1)+a(5)+m(5)+a(5)+t(1)+e(5) = 22
Please show us how to turn that 22 back into your name. Take as much time as you need.
You obviously know very little about encryption. There is a provably unbreakable encryption algorithm. I'll leave it as an excercise to your experienced mind to research which of the many it is.
- Andrew
How about 15+ year software development experience. Of course, it's practically impossible to break the properly seeded and properly programmed rng.
Very impressive credentials. I'll post this again in 9 years...
-á
Quote1: "we believe that publishing a good algorithm and opening it up to real-world scrutiny is a good idea (which meshes nicely with the opinions of the Open Source zealots). The main thing here is not relying on security by obscurity."
There shouldn't be the need for cracking an algorithm. It's the combination of RNG and the algorithm which makes the difference (given that the algorithm is the best possible).
Quote1: "In concert, a good shuffling algorithm and a 64-bit pseudo-random number generator seeded with a proven hardware device should produce shuffles that are both fair and secure. Implementing a fair system is not overly difficult. Online poker players should demand it."
I've been involved in the development of a major online casino, where we early decided to use a natural phenomenon (radioactive decay) as a method for random seed generation. I think the PP approach of using the players mouse movement is a sufficient method too. Given that and the best possible algorithm to shuffle cards it is impossible to predict the cards.
My personal believe is that an online casino/card room operator should be able to publish both the algorithm and the method of random number generation without the risk of compromising safety. If they can't do this it's probably not safe to play there.
1. Quotes from How How We Learned to Cheat at Online Poker: A Study in Software Security (page 3)
/peter (germanicus)
>I've been involved in the development of a major online casino, where we early decided to use a natural phenomenon (radioactive decay) as a method for random seed generation. I think the PP approach of using the players mouse movement is a sufficient method too. Given that and the best possible algorithm to shuffle cards it is impossible to predict the cards.
I guess it's PokerSpot (they claim to use radiactive decay on their site). Correct?
If yes, you are probably of some major bug in their algorithm that leads to exactly the same cards dealt to two (or more) tables.
No, I worked with Gold Club Casino, a Casino without multiplayer poker.
If pokerspot has this problem it has nothing to do with the method of random number generation. It's probably just a bug in their implementation.
/peter
>If pokerspot has this problem it has nothing to do with the method of random number generation. It's probably just a bug in their implementation.
Of course, but rather significant one.
What I REALLY wanna see are all the poster's claiming they win online with these systems going on playing straight-up saying, "This is not true. This was written because he played 72o and got beaten so now he is pissed. Stop bashing the online poker community with your lies from loose play!"
Needless to say, Planet and Paradise were deleted from my system a few weeks ago not knowing "officially" what was going on. All it took for me was some research and player pattern tracking.
-á
This happened two years ago. It doesn't happen anymore. The random number generators used these days are seeded correctly. If you lose it's because you are bad at poker or are on a bad streak.
Chris
Okay. :-)
y did u delete both pps? cuz you thought of collusion? what do u mean by "player patern tracking"? thanks
Please read my previous posts in other threads on the subject. Thanks.
This article is, as pointed out, from a fairly long time ago. The article concerns Delta's software which is still run at Planet among others. The problem was that the random number generator used was one that was only supposed to be used during development, it was never supposed to be used for the real-world program. The random number generator was inadequate. That is not the case with the generators used by Paradise and by the updated Delta software. Paradise, for example, uses unpredictable things such as player mouse movements to seed its random generator.
Chris
This article is old, by now mostly corrected. The only thing not corrected by proper programming is the following:
Collusion is a problem that is unique to poker (as opposed to other games like blackjack or craps), since poker players play against each other and not the casino itself. Collusion occurs when two or more players seated at the same table work together as a team, often using the same bankroll. Colluding players know what their team members' hands are (often through subtle signals), and bet with the purpose of maximizing their team's profits on any given hand. Though collusion is a problem in real cardrooms, it is a much more serious problem for online poker. Using tools like instant messaging and telephone conference calls makes collusion a serious risk to online poker players. What if all the players in an online game are all cooperating to bilk an unsuspecting Web patsy? How can you be assured that you're never a victim of this attack?
This is a fundamental problem with online poker as it is today. Can it be corrected too?
DON'T BOTHER. IT'S JUST OLD NEWS n/t
Tablot - Thanks for the link. The article was a great read. I just hope it doesn't leave people with the wrong impression. Implementing a "secure" shuffling system is relatively simple for an experienced Computer Scientist/Cryptographer/Mathematician. The atricle exposed what can happen when this task is left to the unsophisticated.
As an expert in the field (PHd Computer Science) I can vouch for the accuracy of the article. I also feel they did a nice job of explaining things for the layman.
For those of you that know me from the old Pokerspot's $20-40 HE game I changed my handle at Paradise. I've been playing some small buyin HE tourneys with much success. I've also been playing low limit ring games with about a 2 BB per hour win rate. Being a bit skeptical about the site due to the postings on this forum about collusion I only invested the minimum amout ($50) to check things out for myself. So far I've built my BR to a little over $400. I play a very tight agressive style in both tournamant as well as ring games. I also (IMO) play situations very well which lead some to think I get out of line on occassion and give me action when they shouldn't. I normally play in the afternoon or early evening. Last night I entered a small buyin HE tourney around midnight and noticed the overall play was quite different. At at least half the players knew each other and were chatting so fast I could hardly keep up with all the cross talk. And they weren't just talking about the hands either. They were talking about personal things like getting together, relationships, etc...
Almost every pot was being taken down by inferior hands like Q8o utg; J4s on the button after calling 3-bets cold preflop. Needless to say I didn't survive past the 4th round and got beat the last 3 hands I played after having the lead with top set; AA and KK and having 2 or 3 callers all the way and the winner IMO never should have seen the flop in the first place. All 3 hands got there on the river. Only 1 of those players made it to the top 3 payouts.
Do you consistant winners at PP think this is just similar to weekend play at a live cardroom where the games are filled with live ones? Or if there is collusion at PP is it creeping into these 1 table tourneys as well?
All comments welcome.
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
Sounds just like a typical casino cardroom.
I played $30-$60 hold 'em at The Bellagio last night and quit the game at approximately 1:00 am. The game was somewhat similar to what you are describing. Many hold 'em players, especially if they are stuck begin to play too many hands and go to far with them. Furthermore, some of the plays that you see may actually be correct. For example, in unraised multiway pots we recommend to call with hands like Q5s in HPFAP if you are on the button.
Mason, I've owned HEPFAP and have referred to it for years. I understand when you say when players get stuck many then play too many hands and go to far with them. Heck,we both know many do that without being stuck. May I add that we want that to continue. I also agree that to come in with Qxs or Kxs on the button in an "unraised" multi way pot can also show a profit (only if you play well post flop, because you're almost surely dominated if you flop top pair). However this was a 1 table tourney and these players were calling 3-bets cold on the button with hands like J-4s, catching a 4 on the flop to my AA then catching a J on the river. I know you don't really play online but in your opinion if there is collusion at PP would it be worth it to collude at the low buyins? IMO, not, but wonder.
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
Sorry to bud in here but I just had to comment on this.
What you are referring to does not represent collusion. This is a question of card distribution.
I have found many times on Paradise and Planet that the cards being turned over by winners are by far very low quality starters as well as inconsistent (meaning one minute they will have AA and another time they will have 73o. Furthermore, take notice of the particular players that are turning these cards over and see how they are doing over multiple sessions. If you see they are winning over the long run, you are correct in being suspiscious as every profit player knows these cards simply cannot earn you a profit in rings games and/or tournaments.
In my experience, I have seen this happen many times on Planet and on Paradise and have subsequently stopped playing there. Some will say that I am being paraniod. Others will agree with me however. I'm just offering my observations to help you in your evaluation.
Good luck.
-á
That's what I was hoping is what I experienced. Thanks for your input.
Kind regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
BTW, I'm currently working on a hand analyzer program for Paradise Poker. This will allow you to view a player's win rate, etc... and also what starting cards they show down. It should display enough statistics to show some "facts" about the card distrubution at Paradise in a general sense.
- Tony
P.S. My view is that online poker is generally fair, and that players just tougher than in live play even at lower limits.
How do the two compare ?
I think that Paradise 20-40 on average is much much tougher than Bellagio 30-60.
I watched the 15-30 for a while the other night while saying hello to Jim Brier, and the game looked pretty good. And lower stakes were very soft -- 6-12 at Mirage was way easier than any 3-6 at Paradise.
Mark
i just wanted to agree with this (in general). the 10-20 i played at mirage a couple weeks ago was considerably easier than any 5-10 paradise game ive ever played. ditto for the 10-20 at hollywood park.
The Bellagio 15/30 when I was there had the worst players I've ever played with. I'm serious. Ever.
Of course, a never ending parade of two and three -outers took all my money, but still, they were the worst players I have ever had the opportunity to play with. I mean worse than a PP 1-2, worse than a california 3-6 game, worse than anything.
natedogg
What is your definition of bad play? If the table is exceptionally loose, you have to adapt to win at it. Maybe the other players have adapted to play at such a table?
The 20-40 game in the evenings at highlandsclub are a joke.I mean I could beat this game consistently if I was blind is 1 eye,and had a patch over the other.Try it 1 evening,you won't believe it.
I mean TERRIBLE. They made the worst limit plays I've ever seen. Consistenly going for a two outer with their underpair hoping to hit trips. Believe me, I KNOW how to play in wild loose games. It's not that they played a "different" style more likely to win at a wild loose table. They were terrible. They made errors with each and every round played of each and every hand.
natedogg
Nate,
Most of the 6-12 and 8-16 players were better than that, but I watched Jim Brier play for a short while at 15-30 and while he was looking very very fine (go getem Jim), I watched one or two TERRIBLE players, one guy was playing every hand, he raised with K7o from mid position, what a joke.
In the 8-16 game, one guy played every hand for 2 hours, he got clobbered; and one guy was so funny, he tried to be tricky on every hand he played, he tried to check raise someone twice with an obvious winner; he got so flustered when people joking him about it that he folded his BB with no raise...hehe. But he got great cards and almost broke even he was so tricky.
Mark
I just wanted to comment on this online poker site. After trying out most of them, I think this one by far is one of the better ones in terms of playability, customer support and realism.
Compared to the main two online poker sites being Planet and Paradise, the graphics are good and the user interface is very nicely laid out. The games play very quickly and the card distribution reflects that of a live game. In fact, I have yet to have been dealt quads in over two weeks of steady play which is a nice change from Paradise.
The cashier system is easy to use and I have had no trouble with cashing in and getting paid both by credit card and by check. Poker Spot might have gotten me as a customer if they hadn't had so many problems with their cashier system be it their fault or not. For the record, I have not gotten a cashout from the new processor yet which is very disturbing.
To this point, there has been no server trouble (except for one time when they were upgrading software and the system went down for about 20 minutes.) I have yet to see any unusual server hangs or crashes (granted there are not as many users on this site compared to others.)
The players on the site have also been very friendly. No rudeness from players hitting bad cards was observed and overall they are just cool people to play with.
4Knights also offers a high-hand jackpot of the day which is a pretty nice perk that the other sites do not offer. Of course this is an attempt to attract new players. However with Paradise being the biggest online poker site with respect to the number of customers they have, I have to wonder if they are being greedy over there with the money they make from the rake.
Overall, I feel very good about this one. Once 4Knights.com gets a good player base, they will be a pretty tough contender to Paradise and Planet. Nice job guys!!
-á
P.S. My only complaint about the site is they do not offer ASCII character support which means my name is displayed "Yamate" as opposed to "Yamáte." Better fix this or you'll lose me!! :-)
á
It's all nice - but they usually have 2-3 people playing and this is not a new site - it's up and running for real money for last 4-5 months.
But the 2 or 3 people are very nice.
hi FRED WILL FLIP YOU FOR WHO CHANGES NAME TO????? LOL
No problem.
Yes it can be slow there but I have played a few times with a full table.
And just as I said this, I was dealt quads this evening and currently have the high hand! Go figure... Well, at least it wasn't 5 times in one session. :-)
-á
4 knights do not allow Canadians to play.Makes me wonder why when all the other sites do.
they don't.......and i was going to open an account there
bob l and lynner,they don't allow canadians because you all play to good.YAMATE[excuse spelling],you sound like you work for them,do you? If not,then mention the fact that they seldom have a game going,because i just wasted some of my time looking at them.
No I do not work for them. I am currently employed in New Jersey.
á
Could it be that 4knights is situated in Canada and that they for that reason don't let Canadians play? I've seen that before. I've been working with online casinos since 95 and have been involved in the development of casinosoftware for a Swedish company. Even though their casino operation is located in Antigua they don't let Swedes play.
/peter
Anybody have a good strategy for playing heads up on PP tourneys? If you are in BB and your opponent raises what are your minimum calling requirements(assume 600-1200 blinds)?
I finally started accurately tracking my tournament play and I am averaging a profit of $9 per tourney over the last 50 tries.
However, I must confess that I am really unsure how to play heads up and I haven't worked out the math.
I basically play it looser than HFAP since you get very few hands before your chips are gone.
heads up, if i'm leading and my opponent is very close to all in, I call with almost anything and usually win. If I'm behind I'll try to wait for better hands, but you get blinded off so fast it's usually one or two hands before I'm forced all in. These tourneys are the biggest crap shoot I've ever played, once you get to the final three. The swings are huge with only $8000 on the table and $1000/$2000 blinds. I think it takes skill to get to the money spots, but from there luck really takes over. You have to get some cards in order to win it. Early and middle round play is far more important to me. Heads up I raise with any ace or king. Play it way looser than HPFAP. Way way way looser.
Hi.
I have been playing poker for a little over a year now. I play $0.50/$1-$2/$4 on paradise. I have always been told that you should always raise with AK in most positions, except when you're on the blinds or when you're in a late position with many callers in front of you, and it is offsuit. My question is, why should I ever raise AK, especially unsuited, in these low limit no fold 'em hold 'em games? If you raise AKo early position, you want to limit the field since this hand has reverse implied odds. Most of the time, this doesn't really work. You always have one or both blinds call, and have also one or two cold callers. However, if you do happen to make it two or three handed, and when you flop rags, you can never bet your opponent out of his hand. I see many players call the flop with any pair or any ace or two overcards. So...chances are, your opponent will have a pair, especially if there is more than one player in that hand. Also, when you do flop top pair or better, many people fold after calling the turn, if they don't improve. Also, in middle position and late position, most of the times, you will have few callers before you, and by raising, you'll give them proper odds to draw out later on. Of course AK suited, I think it's ok to raise with many callers, since you'll have a drawing hand as well. I personally prefer to call with AKo in any position. Many times, when you make your hand, you have deceptive value because few will put you on AK, and you'll receive more action. Of course, by calling, you make it cheap for others to see the flop, and they may make a weird hand. However, I figure that many people in low limit think that what's good for one bet is good for two. I think raising discourages very few players to call in the limits I play, and find it pointless. This is what I think of AK(offsuit especially)in bottom limit hold'em. I don't know. Am I missing something here? Please tell me why I should raise with AK!! Comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I'm just bitter with AK because I lost about $30 with the last ten or so AK's I had on paradise. I've failed to flop a pair all ten times, and I always feel pressured to see the turn, whether it is by calling or betting. In what situations should I fold AK on a ragged flop, and when should I call? Thanks.
Paradise? Well, that explains it. :-)
You have to know your players very well when playing big paris in loose games. The sooner you recognize that they will not win for you, the more you will save in the long run.
-á
You'll fail to flop a pair ten times in a row about one time in 50. Not that likely, but not that unlikely either.
First of all to your origianl post...too many ifs. I'm right there with Chris. Read his reply again.
Now you ask: In what situations should I fold AK on a ragged flop, and when should I call?
It depends. Another thing to consider would be how many players called In an unraised multiway pot I would fold most of the time if someone bets the flop. If you raised preflop and are heads up or 3-way I would bet.
Well, will you get just as many callers if you raise with AA or KK in these games? These hands also need to have the field narrowed down to help them win.
The bottom line is, you probably have the best hand in the field so you just have to take your chances with them. I thought the very same thing at one point. From experience, I have learned to go ahead and raise here and just hope for the best. Will they get sucked out on? Yes but rockets will also. In low limit games, big pairs go down in win % but take down much larger pots.
-á
It's a misconception that just because people are going to call for two bets anyway, it means you shouldn't raise. If the flop comes three of a suit and you have a small flush, do you check it down if you think somebody has the ace of that suit because "they will call anyway"? The general rule in poker is if you are ahead, make them pay. When you make it two bets to go preflop, people are free to go ahead and call anyway, but they are making a mistake because your hand is better than theirs.
Their mistake is small, however, if many people call with random hands. But I find by raising UTG you often limit the field to just dominated hands like KT, which are making a big mistake calling.
Chris
You raise preflop with AK to make the pot bigger. Its got nothing to do with chasing people out.
You'll win a smaller pot more often if you chase people out, however winning the pot is not what is important, its maximising your EV that is important.
i heard it said once in a game i was playing in vegas.that those two cards had lost more money than any other two cards . it has always stuck with me ..so i very rarely raise. the eception is if a late player raises i will reraise .ive found this to be very effective in hiding my hand .if an aceor king comes you can still check the flop and turn and be able to raise at this point .and bet the end .ive found this to be my best statergy.some nice pots have come my way by playing this way .by the way last night on internet i went against my better jugment and raised A K suited u t g nothing but rags .im back to doing it the old way .
It's a shame that what you heard has always stuck with you because it's nonsense. It's probably impossible to lose money with AK in any kind of long run, and certainly not by playing it too aggressively before the flop.
ok i will give it a try
Interesting! I posted an almost identical question under "AKs" on May 27th in the Texas Hold'em General Forum. You will be interested in reading some more replies there.
You very likely have the best hand before the flop, so you should raise to make the pot bigger, since you will win it more than your fair share of the time. This is true regardless of how many callers there are (I am assuming that you do indeed have the best hand). Since you're going to win it more than you're fair share, you want the pot to be as big as possible. With more callers, your varience will certainly go up, since you will lose more often, but your [long term] profitability will also rise, since the pots will be correspondingly larger. The reason people lose money with this hand is that it is very, very tempting to just call with two overcards, and give crying calls all the way. I usually raise with this hand with success, but I fold quickly when I know I'm beat (unless, of course, I'm getting the right odds).
But with AK offsuit, if you have four or more callers, won't you actually lose in the long run. I figure that someone will hit a draw, and will have a positive EV to draw since there will be around 8 SBs in the pot? Then, won't that hand be the favorite in the long run? Just my thoughts. Thanks for the response.
It is possible for more than one hand to be making theoretical money (ie have +EV) in a single pot. A simple example is when a made nut straight and a nut flush draw are capping it with all ten players in the pot. Both hands are happy to cap the flop as they are both extracting money from all the other players. A situation like this can occur when it is multiway, that is, a hand like QJs or 88, AS WELL AS your hand AK, might be profiting from your preflop raise. However usually AK is the only hand profiting from a raise. In a situation like this the mistake your opponents are making is coming in for two bets against a stronger hand. You have to be careful not to make any mistakes postflop which will compensate them for this.
Chris
Cool. Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't know that. So, one more question, since I am still just figuring these things, and am prone to errors postflop, would you suggest I still raise AK? Thanks.
Don't ask us to hold your hand. Read the information ChrisV has provided, and act on it. Move on. Look forward to raising AKo as I do.
Yes. You should do anything which you know will increase your EV. Also, in late position you are favoured simply because of your position and in early position you can often limit the field to just dominated hands like KJ, which is very favourable. (This is also why you should never call AJ or worse to a preflop raise).
Chris
Fire away preflop (be wary if reraised), and your postflop decision should be based on wether you hit your hand (sometimes still best to fold when an A or K hits) the number of players in, position and betting. If you are late and it is checked to you, you must bet.
----Original Message----- From: Paradise Poker Technical Support Date: 28 May 2001 23:46 Subject: Re: 10.00 Tournament Results
Hello ,
It definitely sounds like it is time to reboot your computer. When the server send information to your computer it is in encoded. Once your computer receives the information, it then decodes the transmission using a menu that is part of the download on your computer telling the software which cards to picture on your play screen. If for some reason your computer's memory is slow, or delayed, it could be that your computer is misinterpreting the information sent and representing it as the same pockets over and over again, even though that was not in fact the information that was sent. The likelihood of your computer being the source of the problem is further evidenced by the 'fuzzy' screen that you describe. That occurs when your computer is receiving packets of information all at once and is unable to process them in a timely fashion.
I would highly recommend that you reboot your system at this time, as well, please be sure that you try to limit any other programs that you have running alongside our software, such as an MP3 player or any other memory intensive software.
Despite the mentioned problems, we are glad to see that you were still able to finish in the money!
Regards,
Craig Paradise Poker Support
----- Original Message ----- From: To: Paradise Poker Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 4:15 PM Subject: Re: 10.00 Tournament Results
Hi,
I came 2nd in this tourney, but...check out what happened to me in the last 5 or 6 hands with A3 suited I got the same hand over and over. It gets better/worse. I couldn't see my opponents' name because the oval was all fuzzy, like televsion interference (it was coloured and also was a rectangular shape as opposed to oval.)..the worst bit..there were no cards on the board..i was betting blind (I got a house of As & 3s once so i panicked and kept raising all my following a3s)..weird...I was typing this in to runnin bad but the bastard just ignored me. I would have done the sameiI suppose.
gl
J -----Original Message----- From: Paradise Poker >Texas Hold'em Tournament Summary for table "Santa Isabel" >$100 Prize Pool, $10 Buy-In, $1 Fee, 10 players > > > >Tournament started 2001/05/28 @ 15:14:11 (CST) -- Game #78,721,251 > > 1st: runnin bad, $50 prize awarded (Level VII, Game #1) > 2nd: bertrand, $30 prize awarded (Level VII, Game #1) *** > 3rd: DidaWeith, $20 prize awarded (Level VI, Game #4) > > 4th: maccaca (Level VI, Game #2) > 5th: phil20 (Level VI, Game #1) > 6th: Zoomee (Level V, Game #4) > 7th: Phil Jr (Level V, Game #4) > 8th: Sideshow (Level V, Game #1) > 9th: lambler (Level IV, Game #5) > 10th: TheGreat (Level III, Game #7) > > > >Tournament finished 2001/05/28 @ 16:05:37 (CST) -- Game #78,734,602 > >---- >This email was computer generated and emailed to >If you have any questions, please see the tournament web page at >http://www.paradisepoker.com/tournaments.html >
This is likely a problem with available memory. It could be that you haven't rebooted your computer recently and the memory has gotten choked up, or you could be running a memory-eating program. The P2P file-sharer Morpheus and chat program ICQ are two of the worst offenders. I have a Duron 800Mhz/128 Mb RAM and if I leave Morpheus running for any length of time, I start to experience some problems.
Chris
Paradise 5/10 game.
I get QdQc in MP. UTG (fairly tight player) raises, folded to me, I re-raise, rest folds, and UTG calls.
Flop: Ks Jc 8c.
He checks, I bet, he calls.
Turn: 4c
He checks, I bet, he raises, I call.
River:7s
He bets, I fold.
Comments?
Yeah, so what? He made a flush. What's the big deal? You made the only logical plays from my perspective. You would maybe have called on the river if another club falls, particularly if it was the ace or king.
I think the turn play is very debatable. He was a tight raiser, so he could probably have TT-AA, AKs, AKo, AQs, AQo.
With him just calling my bet on the flop, I already was concerned he made a very good hand. With this kind of flop and pre-flop action, I normally expected a check-raise or a fold. So I had a strong indication he would wait till the turn. In this occasion a check on the turn might be fine, and then calling the river if he bet, because a free card wouldnt hurt too much (because if I have him beat, he most likely is drawing a two or three outer, and there's a good possibility he has me beat).
But I bet, and he check-raises me, indicating I'm drawing. But would my flush be good? If he has a set of kings, with Kc, no. If he has AK, with Ac or Kc, no. IMO he wouldnt raise 88 preflop, so I can only beat JJ (except if river is Kc) or KK without Kc . If he made a flush, as you indicate (I personally thing other hands are more likely, because given the preflop raiser he then has to have AcKc or AcQc IMO), then I could very well be drawing dead, because given the preflop raising, he probably then has the nut or second nut flush.
So I think you have to reconsider; this surely isnt the "only logical play".
I agree with you that it is unlikely that he made a flush... or at least there are a number of other possibilities. He could raise with the following hands, all of which have you beat, AA, AK (especially if he has the Ac), KK, JJ or possibly KJs all of which have you beat. With your Qc, the only hand you can beat is JJ or KK without the Kc... however, two-thirds of the time he will have the Kc so I think you are drawing very slim if at all.
Therefore, I don't like the way you played your hand. I think you should have folded when he check-raises you. Or if you call this raise I think you should call the river to see what he has but I would lean toward folding when he check-raises. This of course is all based on your description of the player as a tight raiser.
He called the flop, not raised....so:
either he has a K and you are beat, or not. Why wouldn't you check the turn, and call a bet on the river? He could have raised with any ace, any pair, if he has nothing that can beat your Q's, his only way to win would be to checkraise you on the turn "representing" a flush, and hope you give up. Guess he did and you did.
If your description of the player is accurate I would generally have checked the turn and called the river unless an Ace landed. As soon as he calls the flop bet, I think I am in trouble and I only call the river for table image reasons.
what are the new on line sites that are good, pay, action, etc. ty
What do you believe is the most profitable game on-line?
Any different from real-life?
Lets assume a person has understanding of odds, and plays a solid, disciplined, patient, straightforward game, equally well in Hold'em, stud, omaha/Omaha8. decent hand-reading skills as well. stud hi-lo is a trouble game for this person.
which game should they choose?
why?
nate
Draw poker at Planet. Any true expert will know this.. the ones you mention have a much lower hourly expectation.
ok. thanks. i didnt know anyone had draw.
Since someone has mentioned Planet's draw poker, can I just ask what y'all make of the winning hands there??
Watching my partner play I have been amazed at the frequency with which full house beats full house, flush beats sraight, etc etc. I hace little experience of draw poker but a stream of hands this strong seems totally wrong to me.
This isn't a paranoia/conspiracy theory comment by the way, I play Planet all the time and have no issues with it, but something just seems awry with their draw game. Watch it for just 15 minutes and see if you agree.
I play all the online games including draw, and am sure that the hilo split games are the most profitable. Since you have trouble with 7 stud 8 (which i find extremely profitable online) then Omaha 8 is the best answer. The general level of play at lower limits is abysmal, and a reasonable player can expect to make at least 4-5 big bets an hour without taking many risks. A strong player can go a lot more than this easily but the games do get tougher above $3/6. Draw players can make a lot of bets an hour, but much of the draw profit is tell based, so live games so not translate well to online games.
Other than that learn stud8, its a great game played poorly by many. And if you are having trouble remember to chuck pairs of 9s Ts Js Qs and Ks away before you put any voluntary money in the pot.
I would agree that the Omaha 8 or better in general is a great game for profit of the knowledgeable player in that this game attracts alot of beginners. I would say this is a dynamic question and would depend upon the limits at a 1/2 table I would say the omaha 8, at a 5/10 or even 3/6 table I would lean toward the Holdem. I think the answer to this question varies with amount of buy in and situation/ # of players and their experience at the table!!!!!!
I have been trying to find the thread (I'm sure one exists) about the "cheating expose" supposedly coming out today, but can't figure out which forum to go to. Maybe it is just my screen, but the forums listed on the left are confusing. Can anyone tell me which one/where to click to read what you guys on twoplustwo have had to say about it? thanking you in advance
I have a post on the Other Topics Forum that you may want to read.
It is supposed to be on rgp. As of 6pm Central time, I have not been able to find it. There were numerous posts by the people before the date it was to be "revealed", but nothing today.
Check out this hand…
Game #78368695 - $5/$10 Hold'em - 2001/05/27-06:59:06 (CST)
Table "St. Maarten" (real money) -- Seat 8 is the button
Seat 2: sharky1 ($290 in chips)
Seat 4: HomerSimp ($230 in chips)
Seat 5: Tamin Sandy ($173 in chips)
Seat 6: DinoO ($261 in chips)
Seat 7: human ($239 in chips)
Seat 8: str8jacket ($193 in chips)
Seat 10: deadwoodbd ($389 in chips)
deadwoodbd: Post Small Blind ($2)
sharky1 : Post Big Blind ($5)
Dealing...
Dealt to str8jacket [ Qd ]
Dealt to str8jacket [ 7d ]
HomerSimp: Fold
Tamin Sandy: Fold
DinoO : Fold
human : Raise ($10)
str8jacket: Fold
deadwoodbd: Fold
sharky1 : Call ($5)
*** FLOP *** : [ Ad As Ac ]
sharky1 : Check
human : Bet ($5)
sharky1 : Call ($5)
*** TURN *** : [ Ad As Ac ] [ Ah ]
sharky1 : Check
human : Bet ($10)
sharky1 : Call ($10)
*** RIVER *** : [ Ad As Ac Ah ] [ Js ]
sharky1 : Check
human : Bet ($10)
sharky1 : Call ($10)
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $69 | Rake: $3
Board: [ Ad As Ac Ah Js ]
DoctorS didn't bet
sharky1 bet $35, collected $34.50, net -$0.50 (showed hand) [ Qs 8h ] (four of a kind, aces)
Lungar didn't bet
HomerSimp didn't bet (folded)
Tamin Sandy didn't bet (folded)
DinoO didn't bet (folded)
human bet $35, collected $34.50, net -$0.50 (showed hand) [ Qh Ts ] (four of a kind, aces)
str8jacket didn't bet (folded) [ Qd 7d ] (four of a kind, aces)
deadwoodbd lost $2 (folded)
Too bad I folded I could have split this one :-)
the 8-16 at paradise is a weird game cause it doesnt run all the time and when it does it attracts a weird assortment of players. like players who want a shot at the big time but are too afraid and under bankrolled to play 10-20 or up. it attracts more 3-6 type players than 5-10 or 10-20 players i think. ive noticed this phenomenon repeatedly. the people there, especially when the game first starts up, play dominated hands, bluff too much/act like maniacs and play with short stacks.
what do you all think? true or false?
I never played the limit, but if you're right I surely try it out! (I normally play 5/10)
you know, i've noticed this same phenomenon. I consistently beat the 5/10 and 10/20 both there and other sites... but every time i hop into 8/16 i get busted out super-fast. I dont' know what it is about that game, but i just can't play it :)
-jay
Paradise Tech Support was unable to address this issue. Tech Stuff: I have adequate RAM (128 Mb) and a Voodoo3 3000 Graphics card w/16MB SDRAM (but I had the same problem with the previous graphics card, which was not 3D and had only 8Mb SDRAM). I have no other programs (that I'm aware of) or any music running, and am not running sound effects on PP.
The first table or two (or sometimes more) that I play seem just fine, quick graphics and cursor response. Then on some subsequent table (not necessarily simultaneous, this happens also with only one table at a time going), the cursor will start blinking and moving jerkily and responding sluggishly, disappearing completely for a full second at a time, and the screen is slow to reflect new cards dealt. I have also seen the effect when attempting to play a second table, where the first table remains responsive and the second table does not. I close the second table, and the first table continues to be normal.
I can reboot PP (Ctrl-Alt-Del to end task, but not leave the table, then restart PP) and get back to my table, and everything is just fine again, until the next table or two later, where I have to repeat the process. Yet, at times I've been able to go a full session, anywhere from 2 to 10 different sequential tables, without a problem.
Any ideas on what's causing this?
Marilyn P.
I had a similar problem .Your memory is being over loaded possible.I have two reboot one off my computers occasionally (once a week)because i dont like shutting it down and it can barely handle the load and it slowly over loads its memory.Then you get poor mouse responce.Try rebooting or check your shut down procedure.When you shut down at the end of your day some computers require you to follow a shut down procedure usally cheap ones, most shut down automaticly.
I recognise the same problem too with the software we are developing. I can understand that PP tech-support has a hard time helping you because the problem can’t be easily referred to overloaded memory, hardware problems or software configuration. It’s probably a combination of computer configuration and the way programmers handle sprites (the cursor). I assume that the cursor only blinks and behaves strange when you move it over the PP window?
/peter (germanicus)
I was told if people show interest in playing in games with 5 or less, paradise will start spreading short handed tables. I was told to email support and request it. You should do the same if you want short handed tables on paradise.
what about draw? Does anyone know if they are thinking about spreading draw?
Why so few Draw Poker players at Planet? Don't you Holdem players know that a good Draw player has a much higher hourly expectation than a good holdem player? Ask Mike Caro - I'm sure he'll agree with this...
Fair point, but what is your view of the hands getting dealt in the Planet draw game? Watch for ten minutes and you will see full house beating full house, flush versus straight, etc etc - Now, I am inexperienced at draw so I would like to know if these sort of hands are normal.
Actually I've watched and played for the last three weeks, and the distribution of hands seems perfectly normal. If you can't beat this game handily then you're no poker player..
Well, as I said I have never really played much draw...I just find the hands that are shown when I watch my girlfriend play are quite extraordinary. Maybe its because she plays at the bottom limit and people are routinely drawing to almost anything, but I find full house beating full house beating flush quite unlikely - yet I have seen this sort of showdown repeatedly, even on consecutive hands.
Indeed the game is very beatable, she is winning very nicely despite being a poor/very poor hold'em player. I cannot bring myself to play it personally, I just find it too dull and if hold-em is not going my way I like 08 as a game where it is hard to lose.
I agree with Black Ace. I've played in both the .25-.50 and the $4-8 draw games and they seem very typical to me. Are you drawing to too many st8's and flushes?
Kind Regards,
Gene (holdemdude)
is this jackpots with a joker, or just straight draw?
Straight draw and you can draw up to 5 cards as well.
Shhhh...
:>)
jdp,
A couple of reasons that there are a lot less draw players on planet:
1) They just rolled it out a few weeks ago. It will take people to move out of their comfort zone to give draw a shot.
2) It's slower than hold'em. Waiting for all of those people to select their cards to discard can sometimes take a while. Just wait until they implement double-draw in the lives games. Sheesh!!
3) Hold'em is, to the inexperienced player, easier to beat. Any two cards can win for all they're concerned. In draw, you need a decent hand to drag the pot(2 pair or better). You'd don't see people drawing 5 cards or drawing 2 to a 3-flush drag the pot too often, but you will see 2-7 offsuit winning every once in a while in hold'em.
4) Draw is more of a people game than hold'em. By not being able to see any cards at all, betting habits and tells become a lot more significant in draw. This, of course, is limited to betting patterns in online poker. The good players lose their advantage at draw because of this, and won't bother playing.
5) Draw is considered a dead game by many. How many home games do you know of where people routinely call 5-card draw? It's usually the more "modern" games like Omaha and Hold'em that are being played. People just don't have the experience in draw as they do in Hold'em, therefore they aren't as apt to play it.
Also, in addition, I feel the hold'em games at planet are way easier to beat than the draw games. I usually stick to the .25/.50 and the .50/1 hold'em tables. I generally make anywhere from 5 to 15 big bets per hour at these limits. Why on earth would I go to draw where I'm taking 2-8 big bets per hour. I can honestly play about 75% of my starting hands in hold'em if I wanted to and still come out ahead because of the weak field.
Anyway, just some comments by an online newbie. See ya at the tables.
spanQy
The draw is very beatable, but has a bit greater variance than the holdem. The draw players are bad, particularly in the 25c 50c game, but the same ones will be playing the $1/2 game they are opening.
However i feel the lowlimit holdem players at planet are worse than anywhere else.
Heres my proof.
8 players see flop i'm in BB with AdQd and i raise all 8 call.
Flop is Ah5hAc. i check bet on my right 4 calls, raised by one player and i call, reraised and 6 players call for 3 bets. I fiugure im up against the case ace a hearts draw and who knows what else.
Turn is As, giving me Quads and making me wonder what they were betting on. I check, and betting is capped between 4 players.
River is 10c. I bet, am called, then raised, player folds, i reraise and both call.
There were 42 Big bets in the pot ($1/$2) game in a hand were i had the deck almost crippled after the flop, and totally crippled on the turn. The fish at Planet are not just goldfish they are whale sharks.
A few minutes after sitting down in a 3/6 game at Paradise I raise in early position with QQ. Late position player re-raises, button calls, blinds are gone, I call. I have no read on the re-raiser. Flop is K,7,3. How do you play it? (Scroll down for results.)
I check, player bets, button calls, I fold. Turn is a blank. Bet and button calls. River is also a blank. Bet and button calls. Player shows JJ, button folds, does not show hand.
Correction: No need to scroll down.
You played it correctly. A reraise usually means AA, KK, QQ, or AK (sometimes lower). Since you just sat down you need to assume normal play. Even if you knew the guy was loose the button call has got to scare you as well.
Your out of position, two players left, overcard on the board, you were 3 bet on the flop, and you only have two outs.
Easy fold
I got an email from paradise offering a 15% bonus for deposits (minimum of either 50 or 100 hands played).
Have their player base decreased over the last few months? or is this just a marketing ploy (seen all the time with internet sportsbooks)?
They are just offering something because the other sites are. They probably had the idea in mind for some time and thought now would be a good time to do it.
-á
You are getting their email for the same reason I did - you havent played there in over 60 days - its a marketing ploy to lure players who previously played there and quit (for whatever reason) to come play again.
I was pissed because they were offering it to players who haven't played in a while but they give nothing to the regulars.
I emailed them and they offered it to me too.
22 and AK utg. I fold the first, and raise the second. Yet 22 is beating AK at this stage? Why do I do this?
Out of interest, is it a good idea to muck 22-77/88 utg? I just feel pathetic limping in with 77 utg. Unless it is an ultra passive "no preflop raise" table. If it is 0.0005% players per flop I may raise 88 utg to get heads up with blinds and steal on flop, but most of the time I can't see how playing small pairs up front is profitable.
22 and AK utg. I fold the first, and raise the second. Yet 22 is beating AK at this stage? Why do I do this?
'cause 22 is beating AK (barely) headsup only. Add a third player and AK turns into a monster while 22 turns into a pussy.
Out of interest, is it a good idea to muck 22-77/88 utg?
Nothing wrong with that. I play (with a raise) 77 and 88 utg, but mucking is okay. You gotta play your 99 though and you gotta dump your 66.
Angelina Fekali
If you went thru your entire online poker career always dumping 66's and always raising with 77's, UTG in a full game, you would do just fine. Even though it is pretty silly for me disagree with Angelina. I believe that the game situation decides how you should play these borderline hands.
With a calling station in BB then look to your left and assess the chances of an aggressive player three betting with less than a top quality hand. The greater the chance of being paid off by BB and the less chance of being isolated by an aggressive player, you should raise with 66's (even 55's in extreme cases).
With several aggressive players behind, I would rather limp (that's right, but in this type of game I would limp AA,KK and AK also), with 77's and 88's.
Angelina, if you disagree, go ahead and barbeque me, but don't burn on me only one side.
MS Sunshine
In addition to what Angelina said: 22 is either a very small favourite or a massive dog (versus a higher pair). AK is a massive dog versus nothing except AA and KK. Also, if 22 happens to outflop the opponent's hand, they generally have at least 6 outs (to a higher pair) while if AK outflops the opponent, they can be drawing to only two outs (with a pocket pair) or virtually dead (with two undercards).
Chris
(poker site owners please read) As a winning online poker player I wanted to share a few of my current thoughts on the matter.
Over the last year and a half I have won approx. $25,000 online. Now some of the posts on here about cheating are just plain silly. 6 months ago, my reply to cheating online was "Yes..it happens, but the players are so bad at it,that it doesn't matter..I still win therefore I don't care.".
Now I feel things are changing...Not only did most of the bad players go broke, but also the bad cheaters went broke...Don't get me wrong, I am still winning but my win rate has probaly dropped in half at least. I do not even get the feeling that I am outplaying very many people anymore.
I also work in the casino industry and at least 95% of the people that talk to me about playing online bring up either the possibility of cheating or say that they have been cheated. This is not good.
My suggestion to new sites:
Lower the drop to $2.00...Sites like pokerspot,ultimatebet, and metropolis(etc..)..These sites are lucky to get 1 or 2 tables, their software is not even close to paradise..They really have no excuse to be charging $3.00 max.
I can understand planet and paradise leaving their drop at $3.00 since they don't want a price war, but in the next few years Im sure things will change.
There is an optimal $ amount for a casino to charge it's players....Online poker is screwing up big time. Sure there user base is growing, but I would guess that nearly 30-50% of all players who sign up, do not player more than 3 months. After they go broke, they complain to everyone how they were cheated...
Imagine if the Commerce raised there drop 200% on all games...They would dry up..Only the strong would survive.
This is exactly what is happening online, with a few exceptions:
#1:The internet is growing so rapidly
#2:Every live gambler hasn't tried it yet and wants to test the waters.
Also, I am very surprised that no company to date has yet come close to paradise's software...I will be one of the first ones to jump ship when it finally happens. 1.5 years they've been online, and all we see is bug riddled,slow,poor user-interface software from other companies thinking their going to get rich by offering the same $3.00 drop..
Another suggestion: Some companies put 20-25% of their sales back into advertises..Try putting this amount into cheating prevention...Software, cheating task forces..And share your "cheater lists" with other sites.(If roy cooke and mike caro were really interested in stopping cheating they would have planet do this).
lol...Okay Im done.
n/t
Hey.... the fact that Jimmy Hoffa diverted Teamsters' funds doesn't discount that they built a lot of casinos...... the fact that he, and many others went to jail, doesn't mean that the games weren't straight....the fact that half of the Nevada Gaming Commission banned list still lives in Vegas doesn't mean anything......the fact that you are whining that you don't have enough suckers to cheat anymore....strikes me as funny....tee,he,he.....
Whatever happened to Hasselkop?.... Does anyone remember him? Does he play anymore? He was one of the best short-handed players I ever saw. Also, what's become of Angelina? I don't see her playing anymore either; has she moved on to another site?
I suspect these players have changed their on line handles so players do not know who they are.
As for Angelina, I saw her playing at 2 tables and making big yesterday.
Angelina plays under her brothers handle jasari occasionally. As for hasselkop he is likely busted or has lost his will to play.
Angelina plays under her brothers handle jasari occasionally Also, my bro does not play online (except play-money headsup practice about once a week against selected friends) and does not have a real-money account on Paradise at all. Angelina Fekali
I found it amusing checking out Angelinas web page.pictures look great but at the very bottom check out "paradise casualties".Im happy I wasnt on there.Many are-are you?
I use the "camera" photograph as wallpaper for a constant reminder of what I can aspire to with a lot of effort. Only four more bellies to go and I'll be there.
didnt jasari started playing 3/6 on paradise 18-24 months ago? pokeher
Hi all.
I have been playing on Paradise for a while now and doing quite well.
I have not yet been keeping notes on the other players, and I know I'll have to do that if I want to play in the higher limits.
How should I go about organizing all the data from hand histories? Is an index card big enough?
How do some of you do this?
Thanks.
I did a powerpoint slide in the shape of a paradise table. By each seat I have a section to mark certain characteristics (aggressiveness, loose/tight, slowplay/checkraiser, capable of bluffing, defends blinds, etc.). I also make general notes on how someone plays or the moves they make in certain situations.
Keeping notes helps me stay more focused on the game.
There are hand analyzers for sale (check rpg) that will take hand histories from Paradise and create reports. I was thinking about getting one but I do not know the quality.
I'm currently working on one that will be for sale as shareware. It is still in Beta though...
http://www.thsoftware.com
It will be released in about a month. BTW, keep ALL your hand history files! Even after you have entered them into whatever database you end up using. The reason is that your choice of database program or format can change. Also, if you parse and store certain information, and later decide to store more information, you need your original hand history files.
I save them in a format where I can locate them by date (since a single file of a hundred hands may contain tourney hands, ring games, HE and 7CS hands also):
2001-02-03-0046.txt
This is for a hand history that took place Feb. 3rd, 2001, at 12:46am midnight. I use the time of the first hand in the file of 100 hands (I request 100 hands every 45 minutes or so).
- Tony
It would have to be one big ass index card. I have over one thousand profiles on four different databases.
MS Sunshine (mr)
Isn't there some law that forces disclosure of personal information held on a database? What if Vince Lepore demands to know what you have written about him?
Yeah, I'll open my database for this Vince guy. Just as soon as he meets three conditions:
1. He play at least $10-20. I don't keep track of $1-2 games, Vince, sorry.
2. A Freedom Of Information form properly filled out.
3. A pig with wings, that can fly, and is wearing an ascot.
Happy to help.
MS Sunshine (mr)
Man, maybe I am way behind the times. I have a one page crib sheet with about 20 names under various categories such as solid, fish, maniac, loose-aggressive etc.
I probably use the hand history function on an average of 2 hands per session...too damn lazy to look up more than that.
One thousand profiles...wow...You guys take your poker seriously...I would love to see your profile on me.
I have you classified as 'weak semi-tight'.
Would love to improve. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
I don't want you to improve. I like you just the way you are.
That makes two of us.
I wish I played like SKP.Going out on a limb,I say that skp is if not the best then in the top 5 best players at all of planet.However I will not reveal what his online handle is but those who know it will almost definately agree.
Thanks for the kind words, Bob but I don't know that I would put myself in the top 5. There are several excellent players at Planet. In particular, many of the guys who play exclusively in the 5 player max tables are IMO of world class caliber and much better players than yours truly. As a result, I have stuck to the ring games. Glad to report that I have enjoyed considerable success there and I hope that my good run continues.
Haven't seen you there lately...which sites are you frequenting these days and which appear to have the best games?
what limits do u play at both pp's.? also holdem or stud? thanks
HE 20-40 at Planet. I don't play at Paradise other than the odd heads-up game for practice at low limits or the odd tourney.
Yes SKP I havent played planet much in the last couple months.I still play paradise daily(have only done so so and I changed my name).I have also been playing alot this year at highlands and have done great.Ive also been playing lately at ultimatebet.Software is great and I got my first cheque from there last week -took 2 days (i was very impressed) and thats about it.Hows the golf game?
Golf game's looking all right. Let's play pal. I'll try and get Westwood Plateau for us this month sometime.
Oh, you should have seen me play last night at Planet. Yes, you would have put me in with the worst 5 players at Planet. Man, what horrible play...you know, I should post something about this on one of the theory forums to see if others have this problem. Anytime, I get on a real good streak (as I did all of May), I suddenly overrate my own abilities and start playing horseshit cards....sigh...back to the drawing board.
Glad to hear you are still doing well on the net. Any 20-40 on Ultimatebet?
You had one bad night eh? -Well even Gretzky had a few off nights and Tiger sometimes shoots par.Golfing sometime this summer sounds great.Ultimatebet only goes up to 10-20 at the moment.It is definately worth checking out.(but then again you have had great success at planet so why change?)
Sometimes I notice that some players seem to take forever to respond to a bet or a raise. Now, I'll be able to amuse myself while I'm waiting by picturing them scrabbling through pages and pages of notes, looking to see what that raise from that seat by that player with that flop actually means. It must be terribly upsetting for them when they find out that the player under scrutiny varies his play.
No scrambling. A short bio is sitting on screen for every player in the game, in order of their seat position. This sitting in plain view right below game.
MS Sunshine
that's about 10 % of what you should have.
Isn't that the truth. They are also never complete enough.
MS Sunshine
You guys need to get a life. -:))
What is the difficulty level like as one goes goes to bigger buyins?
Are the 10+1 buyin tourneys tougher than the 5, or about the same?
What about higher than that?
Don't play the $5 because of the rake (20%).
The games do get tougher as you go. The question as to how much tougher is subject to debate.
There was a funny post earlier this month as to whether the increase in player quality is geometrical, exponential, or other.
The $10 tourney is very beatable if you play well. If you are new to tourneys start at the $10 and move up when you can beat it consistently (i.e., money about half the time and a return at least $5 per game).
Good luck
I agree the $5 tournies are a waste of time. The $10 tournies are very easily beaten, and importantly once you make the money it is easy to get first. I have never played higher than $10 tournies, as the rake doesn't decrease until the $100 tournies and then you have serious competition.
Choice of game is important. 7 Stud 8 is my best real money game, but my worst tournie game, mainly due to the reduced payouts (only a $3 profit for 3rd).
Omaha 8 is very beatable in $10 tournies. However while i have made the money in 9 of 10 tournies i have only won 2 times. Omaha 8 is a hard gmae to bully heads up.
10 tournies 2 1sts, 4 2nds, 3 3rds.
Holdem is harder to make the money but easier to make 1st as blinds are easily stolen, and hands are more easily read.
84 tournies 45 1st, 12 2nds, 3 3rds.
Those numbers are amazing. You are making over 250% ROI. To hit the money 50% is quite good. To make it more often you have to be very fortunate.
This is what I have seen over about 100 tournies ranging from 11-55.
1) About 1/3 of the time, you get no cards and have no chance of making the money.
2) About 1/3 of the time you get very good cards and can coast to the money.
3) The final 1/3 of the time are on the edge of money or no money. Sometimes you get lucky and someone busts out before you do and othertimes you bust out before others.
You must have a trick to push yourself into the money 75% of the time. Maybe just playing the $11 tournies against weaker competition is enough.
Ken Poklitar
I agree.
I don't know how you can consistently get in the money over 50%.
I am pretty darn strong at getting to the money and I am at 46%. Certainly there are better players than me. However, I highly doubt that there are players that have a 30 percentage point advantage over me at getting into the money (Although it might be possible).
The number of firsts is even more extraordinary given the high luck factor at the later stages of the game.
At best, you results have to be a statistical anomaly.
Holy shi**!!!!! About 1/3 of the time you get incredible cards and coast to the money!?!?!
I don't know if you should count this phenomenon holding steady.
natedogg
My percentages for the 3 types of games might be off. I was trying to come up with a way to categorize most games.
When I say very good cards, that means that the 1st 3 or 4 levels you don't lose piles of chips. At around level 4 or 5 you hit one or two good hands that puts you into solid position for the money. So coast might be too strong of a term.
Ken Poklitar
Ok, I get it. That makes more sense. :)
natedogg
I too find these numbers unbelievable.
A statistical super-anomaly I would say. Even when you get in the money, when the blinds go to 600/1200 or 1000/2000, it is a crapshoot, and placing first that many times is unbelievable.
The tournies are beatable and profitable, but please.
The difficulty is getting to the money. If you can hit the top 5 with chips, then picking at the small stacks is enough to make it.
And getting first is not hard, most players have little or no heads up experience. I started poker playing nolimit heads up or 3 handed. I have 3 national heads up titles (New Zealand), and find this stage of the tournie very easy.
but how easy can it be when there are a total number of $8000 in chips when the blinds are 500/1000 and playing 1000-2000? One failed blind stealing and you're second place.
You're right about little/no experience heads up. Is there any good written material available for these final-stage tournament hands?
I've played the $10 PP stud tourneys only 11 times, got 3 1st, 3 2nd, out of the money 5 times. I also won the only Omaha/8 and the only Stud/8 tourney I tried. I'd never played any tournaments prior to PP.
The final-stage hands are a challenge, and I realized about stud tournament number 6 that I needed to steal whenever possible. I "accidentally" won the first stud tourney (clueless--but hit quads on final all-in hand), then was out of money for the next 4, then got 1st, 5th (had 2 barely playable hands through level 5 and busted out), 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd in that order on the final six.
I'd like to keep this up, but according to above posts I'm experiencing a statistical anomaly. Having some advice from some of you tourney and heads-up experts would be great. Maybe "Tournie lover" would start a thread on the topic as it applies to Internet poker?
Also, there appear to be numerous lunatics populating the $10 stud tourneys. Any advice for handling these when they magically wind up in the final 3?
Marilyn P.
I have played over 800 tournaments from $10 to $100. I have made the money 33.6% of the time. Once in the money 1st 40%, 2nd 33% and 3rd 27%. I think I am an above average player having made the money in major tourneys and daily tourneys about 20% of the time. I find it hard to believe that you can make the money as many times as you say and have that great a win vs. 2 and 3rd. I am sure we have played against each other...too bad I don't know your PP handle so I can stay away from you.....LOL
How can you tell what the buy-in is for a Paradise Tournament hand history? As in if it's a $10 tourney, etc... is there a way from the hand history file Paradise sends you? Thanks!
- Tony
It says in the first or second line the buy-in for the tournament and the current level and hand.
Thx. I was looking at a hand history from several months back which was missing this information.
I don't know if this has been addressed in the past, but I would like to warn all players to avoid PokerSpot.Com. They are completely stiffing the players they owe money to.
A quick overview:
Request 2,500.00 cash out. Get a check. It bounces.
Go through months of waiting through excuses, law suit pending messages, etc. etc.. Told I would get 5 monthly payments starting in April.
April comes and goes. I get E-mail that they are checking all winning player's hand histories as they suspect fraud!!!
Now??? After all this time they want to check me out? What a scam.
Since then they will not even answer my numerous e-mail requests.
There is no reason to put money into an account to play at PokerSpot.Com. Please pass the word.
Mick
This has deen debated at some length here before. Nevertheless you manage to cut through so much of the BS that have been said regarding the site in an admirable way. Thanks.
For what it's worth, I received my first 20% of the cashout from the old processor. Nothing since then however.
I made another cashout using their new processor and did not receive that yet either.
-á
Yamate:
I'm exactly in the same situation as yourself. I got my first installment payment of $400 (20% of the $2,000 cashout I did in January). That check has cleared my bank OK. It arrived at the beginning of May. It was due on April 15th.
I also recently cashout an additional new withdrawal for a little over a grand.
I have not received any money or emails at all yet. Looks real bad...but I'm still keeping my fingers cross. Pokerspot.com is a disgrace to the online poker community in their bad management of players funds. It's bad integrity will cause a complete lack of trust and faith in ALL of the other "smaller" online cardrooms in terms of prompt and sufficient cashouts.
I downloaded the software but I am unable to open Highlands from my desktop it just says requesting login approval from server. Any ideas guys?
same thing happened to me
Me too
Call their support line @ (800) 245-0553 and I am sure they will be able to assist you.
as larry says,call their [800-245-0553]support staff,they are very helpful and polite.I play there and got an e-mail from them today saying that by 1PM E.S.T. on monday,6/4/01,they will have a new version of their software installed where there will be 2 more jackpots added to the one they have now.present 1 is over $15,000.00[after getting hit for $54,000.00 about 4 weeks ago],now they will be adding 2 more monday,both will be much easier to hit than the big one.also downloading and signing on is going to be greatly simplified.They're working hard to improve their site with other giveaways too.see you there next week.
I've had the same problem, but am not calling an international number to get help. If anyone has a solution to the problem, i'd love to hear it
The number is a toll free number in the US. You can also email them at support@highlandsclub.com. They have a small download that need to be installed to make things work correctly and I have lost the link to it. It may be moot at this point as the software is to be upgraded on Monday, June 4.
WHAT OTHER SITE LETS THE 100 PLAYERS THAT PLAYED THE MOST HANDS PLAY IN A TOURNAMENT THE 1ST TUESDAY OF EACH MONTH WHERE THEY GIVEAWAY $5,350? THIS,COMBINED WITH THEIR 3 DIFFERENT BAD BEAT JACKPOTS SHOWS THEY ARE TRYING TO GIVE BACK SOME OF THE MONEY THEY RAKE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS,AND ARE NOT HOGS LIKE SOME OF THESE OTHER POKER SITES.[1 MORE THING,I'VE WON THE LAST 6 PLAYS I'VE MADE THERE,I HOPE I'M NOT BEING PREJUDICE]
thanks for the help guys. Its good to see this fourm being useful instead of all the uselessness we get about bad beats and such
I have the same problme; have'nt bothered doing anything, as there aere plenty of other sites to choose from.
http://www.highlandsclub.com/hlipqupdate.exe fixes the problem.
Here's my idea of a dream hand. Would anyone else have played it this passively? Comments more than welcome.
Background: "Victim" had just arrived at the table, so I didn't have a read. "Any2WillDo" was playing just that...he'd showed down J2o and Q3o since I'd been there. He also seemed to play whenever he caught even a small piece of the flop, and wasn't being tricky at all. Game #79324298 - $5/$10 Hold'em - 2001/05/30-19:08:28 (CST) Dealing... Seat 5 : Fold *** FLOP *** : [ 9s 8c 9c ] *** TURN *** : [ 9s 8c 9c ] [ 4s ] *** RIVER *** : [ 9s 8c 9c 4s ] [ 2s ] *** SUMMARY ***
Hi all.
Is it just me or have the games at Paradise poker been unusually tight lately?
I remember not too long ago when I could find a nice juicy 5-10 game just about any time (except late at night.)
Now even the 2-4 games rarely have over 40% seeing the flop.
Questions:
1) I notice that you can add a max of 2000 to your account per month via credit card. Does this month start on the 1st and end at the end of the calendar month? If that were so, that might explain why the games have been drying up - and also implies that they will fatten up starting on the 1st.
2) Are the games generally not as good during the summer? When are the peak times to play in terms of:
Month of year Day of week Time of day
Thanks.
I've read that end of month is not as good. Beginning of the month is slightly better. This is due to the limit on how much you can buy at Paradise each month in terms of a cash-in. People who go broke (the sucky players) buy in at the beginning of the month.
Personally I find weeknights from say 6pm-12pm (or is that 12am?) PST the best time. Fridays I don't find particularly good (I always thought Fridays would be great!), I'm not sure why. Hope this helps!
- Tony
As far as I know, the $2000 limit is per 30 day period and does not run by a calendar month.
I have also noticed the games tightening a bit, but they also seem to be more passive. The net result is positive expectation with lower variance.
I've been with PP since their inception, and without question, the games are harder and tighter.
I've been with PP since their inception, and without question, the games are harder and tighter now.
Hi Guys,
I have been playing the $30 and $50 paradise tournaments for some time now (over 75 in total) and have achieved a ROI of about 50% - a little more in the $30 and a little less in the $50.
I am thinking about starting to play in the $100 tournies, and I was wondering if anyone who has made the step up before had any advice -
Is the skill level much different to the $50 and $30 tournaments?
When clciking on the tables in progress, I tend to see a lot of the same people playing $100 tournament after tournament, are there any players in particular that I should be aware/wary of?
Do you think that my ROI should be about the same as for the $50 tournaments?
Anything else that you can think of!
Thanks in advance for your help.
J
50 is as high as i have gone myself, so can not really help....but having gone thru same thought reocess, let me say (1) such few tables means LONG waiting time, equals time lost (2)watching,made me think fewer soft spots. Jim
I've played in a bunch of the $20-$50 dollar tourneys and have done pretty well. The $50 dollar tourneys I've played in have been a bit tougher but not appreciably. I played in one $100 dollar tourney just to see how I'd do and noticed the following things:
1. There were no terrible players at the table. 2. A lot of the players knew each other (not just from playing together on the internet). 3. There were a few very good players. 4. The conversation was very intimidating...there was a lot of "Bob did you play in blah championship in vegas last month?" "Yeah, I came in 4th and won 28000" "Remember Bill Jones, that guy we played with at the Bellagio, he won $150K last week at blah tourney."
I came in second without any big suckouts or anything like that, so maybe it wasn't that bad...but I went back to the lower tourneys beacause I think they are MUCH easier. Ending up in they money is not by any means impossible in the $100 tourneys, but I assume you are usually up against pretty tough opponents in the final 3, whereas you are often up against at least one poor player who got to the end with a few lucky draws in the lesser tourneys and have a much easier time winning.
My few experiences with the $100 tourneys was the same as Glenn's (except the best I did was 4th--argh!) I think the skill level is definitely higher in the $50 and $100 tourneys, and I do much better in the $20 and $30 ones (and lose less playing time to waiting for a table).
What is the best way to combat someone who raises almost all the time in heads up play. Are there any particular strategies one can use? I feel like I do so much better against the more passive players than the really hyper aggressive ones. Also some other questions... I play shorthanded at paradisepoker sometimes on the NON heads up tables. What this means is that for instance the small blind puts up 1 dollar, the big blind puts up 2, yet the small blind acts FIRST preflop, and throughout the entire hand. In what ways does this affect the game? I find myself raising a lot less from the SB than I do at the normal heads up tables, yet raising a LOT more from the BB.
I think the best way to play against these players is to let them hang themselves.It is generally useless to make any moves against these types (unless you have a big hand) because they will reraise or raise or bet any possible gutshot straight draw,runner runner flush draw,overcard draw,any pair or ace or king high.Therefore the only way to play against these types is to wait for a hand and then punish them and get in the raising war.But you cant keep folding non big hands.These players will bet and keep betting virtually any 2 cards so you will have to just check and call with any pair and AorK or (Q sometimes) high.Against passive players you can make a move with A or K high or draws and get them to lay hands down but against these types they wi
Posted by: ChrisVWH (cvinall@smug.adelaide.edu.au)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 12:40 a.m.
Posted by: Ikke
Posted on: Monday, 28 May 2001, at 8:36 p.m.
Posted by: MD
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 3:07 a.m.
Posted by: Ikke
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 6:27 a.m.
Posted by: clinteroo (csharcourt@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 10:12 a.m.
Posted by: CrazyJim
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 1:03 p.m.
Posted by: DaveMcG
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 3:08 p.m.
Posted by: WEM (WWWWW@AOL.COM)
Posted on: Monday, 28 May 2001, at 10:57 p.m.
Posted by: Nate Foster
Posted on: Monday, 28 May 2001, at 11:48 p.m.
Posted by: jdp (justinpen@primus.com.au)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 7:13 a.m.
Posted by: Nate Foster
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 7:24 a.m.
Posted by: Black Ace
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 8:28 a.m.
Posted by: Mr. Peterson
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 11:18 p.m.
Posted by: Jason Reynolds (jkrsooner2000@aol.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 3 June 2001, at 3:11 p.m.
Posted by: pokerbratt (pokerbratt@mindspring.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 12:59 p.m.
Posted by: Mason Malmuth (MasonMalmuth@TwoPlusTwo.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 2:17 p.m.
Posted by: Keith H
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 7:01 p.m.
Posted by: str8jacket
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 1:10 p.m.
Posted by: mike l. (df@asd.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 6:34 p.m.
Posted by: Ikke
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 7:18 p.m.
Posted by: JXP (jxpfeer@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 9:40 a.m.
Posted by: Marilyn Philips (philips@xkl.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 7:19 p.m.
Posted by: joe
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 10:28 p.m.
Posted by: Peter Kerschbaumer (peter@riverkingdom.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 2:37 a.m.
Posted by: stud
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 7:38 p.m.
Posted by: jdp (justinpen@primus.com.au)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 8:18 p.m.
Posted by: Black Ace
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 5:53 a.m.
Posted by: jdp (justinpen@primus.com.au)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 7:48 a.m.
Posted by: Black Ace
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 11:34 a.m.
Posted by: Gene (holdemdude) (shalomgene@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 8:00 a.m.
Posted by: nate foster
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 10:53 a.m.
Posted by: Gene (holdemdude) (shalomgene@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 11:45 a.m.
Posted by: Gene (holdemdude) (shalomgene@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 7:56 a.m.
Posted by: spanQy
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 6:26 p.m.
Posted by: Mr. Peterson
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 9:41 p.m.
Posted by: George (gstephens@anthill.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 10:32 p.m.
Posted by: George (gstephens@anthill.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 10:33 p.m.
Posted by: dk (davidked@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 12:00 a.m.
Posted by: docriver
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 May 2001, at 11:47 p.m.
Posted by: Yamáte (rvarney@ptd.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 8:54 a.m.
Posted by: Eltern
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 12:30 a.m.
Posted by: dk (davidked@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 12:44 p.m.
Posted by: Miles Davis
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 1:09 a.m.
Posted by: Angelina (angelina@fekali.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 3:34 a.m.
Studying People Inc.
http://www.fekali.com/angelina
Slovenia
Posted by: MS Sunshine (jbuchan3@midsouth.rr.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 12:38 p.m.
Posted by: ChrisVWH (cvinall@smug.adelaide.edu.au)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 7:09 a.m.
Posted by: Me (dwool@mediaone.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 8:25 a.m.
Posted by: ME
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 8:53 a.m.
Posted by: Andrew
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 5:28 p.m.
Posted by: NumNutz
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 10:46 a.m.
Posted by: Newbie
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 2:21 p.m.
Posted by: SOON
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 1:20 a.m.
Posted by: yo
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 3:02 p.m.
Posted by: Angelina (angelina@fekali.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 5:27 p.m.
Never, bad info. Jasari is a player from Izmet's private game. I have no association with him whatsoever, I barely know him and I certainly never play on other people's accounts and I can't imagine a reason to ever do so.
Studying People Inc.
Ljubljana, Slovenia
http://www.fekali.com/angelina
"You don't know Ange. She raises you, you stay raised." - Piesang
Posted by: WW
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 4:00 a.m.
Posted by: Jenny Fivebellies
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 11:20 a.m.
Posted by: bitchass
Posted on: Saturday, 2 June 2001, at 4:43 p.m.
Posted by: Conan the Librarian
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 12:40 p.m.
Posted by: dk (davidked@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 1:56 p.m.
Posted by: Tony
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 2:48 a.m.
Posted by: MS Sunshine (jbuchan3@midsouth.rr.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 2:02 p.m.
Posted by: :^)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 2:17 p.m.
Posted by: MS Sunshine (jbuchan3@midsouth.rr.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 7:21 p.m.
Posted by: skp (supriyabc@home.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 12:47 a.m.
Posted by: Fetish
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 2:14 a.m.
Posted by: skp (supriyabc@home.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 3:14 p.m.
Posted by: Fetish
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 4:51 p.m.
Posted by: skp (supriyabc@home.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 9:16 p.m.
Posted by: Bob L
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 12:33 a.m.
Posted by: skp (supriyabc@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 3:34 p.m.
Posted by: bitchass
Posted on: Saturday, 2 June 2001, at 4:27 p.m.
Posted by: skp (supriyabc@home.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 2 June 2001, at 5:12 p.m.
Posted by: Bob L
Posted on: Sunday, 3 June 2001, at 12:58 a.m.
Posted by: skp (supriyabc@home.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 3 June 2001, at 6:45 p.m.
Posted by: Bob L
Posted on: Monday, 4 June 2001, at 2:09 a.m.
Posted by: Jenny Fivebellies
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 11:11 a.m.
Posted by: MS Sunshine (jbuchan3@midsouth.rr.com)
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 4:42 p.m.
Posted by: Andrew
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 9:21 a.m.
Posted by: MS Sunshine (jbuchan3@midsouth.rr.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 11:14 a.m.
Posted by: stocksnaces (stocksnaces@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 3:48 p.m.
Posted by: Conan the Librarian
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 12:45 p.m.
Posted by: dk (davidked@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 1:51 p.m.
Posted by: Tournie lover
Posted on: Wednesday, 30 May 2001, at 9:10 p.m.
Posted by: ohKanada (ohkanada@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 1:21 p.m.
Posted by: dk (davidked@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 2:47 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 3:24 p.m.
Posted by: ohKanada (ohkanada@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 4:43 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 6:41 p.m.
Posted by: J'sPop
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 4:40 p.m.
Posted by: Tournie lover
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 11:06 p.m.
Posted by: jw (dasuaveasian@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 2 June 2001, at 5:42 a.m.
Posted by: Marilyn Philips (philips@xkl.com)
Posted on: Monday, 4 June 2001, at 5:39 p.m.
Posted by: Newbie
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 11:05 a.m.
Posted by: Tony
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 2:42 a.m.
Posted by: Chris (chris.oster@sympatico.ca)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 9:06 a.m.
Posted by: Tony
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 6:41 a.m.
Posted by: Mick
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 12:43 p.m.
Posted by: Tom (tom.tank@organizer.net)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 4:13 p.m.
Posted by: Yamáte (rvarney@ptd.net)
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 9:27 a.m.
Posted by: OnLine Poker Dude
Posted on: Saturday, 2 June 2001, at 6:19 a.m.
Posted by: JIM
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 3:19 p.m.
Posted by: g
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 8:11 p.m.
Posted by: Hidek6 (john@hidek.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 10:01 p.m.
Posted by: Larry (larry@marsoft-systems.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 10:10 p.m.
Posted by: YOU WIN
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 11:28 p.m.
Posted by: Mr. Peterson
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 11:30 p.m.
Posted by: Larry (larry@marsoft-systems.com)
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 7:42 a.m.
Posted by: WRAPITUP
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 11:38 p.m.
Posted by: JIM
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 3:09 a.m.
Posted by: Piers
Posted on: Saturday, 2 June 2001, at 3:35 a.m.
Posted by: Mr. Peterson
Posted on: Sunday, 3 June 2001, at 5:39 p.m.
Posted by: Chris (chris.oster@sympatico.ca)
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 4:06 p.m.
Table "Papeete" (real money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Seat 1: Seat 1 ($328 in chips)
Seat 2: Any2WillDo ($176 in chips)
Seat 3: Innocent Bystander ($237 in chips)
Seat 4: HERO ($343 in chips)
Seat 5: Seat 5 ($179 in chips)
Seat 6: Seat 6 ($286 in chips)
Seat 7: Victim ($298.50 in chips)
Seat 8: Seat 8 ($188 in chips)
Seat 9: Seat 9 ($86 in chips)
Seat 10: Seat 10 ($68 in chips)
Innocent Bystander : Post Small Blind ($2)
HERO: Post Big Blind ($5)
Dealt to HERO [ 9h ]
Dealt to HERO [ 8d ]
Seat 6 : Fold
Victim: Call ($5)
Seat 8 : Fold
Seat 9 : Fold
Seat 10 : Timed out
Seat 10 : Fold
Seat 1 : Fold
Any2WillDo : Call ($5)
Innocent Bystander : Call ($3)
HERO: Check
Innocent Bystander : Check
HERO: Check
Victim: Bet ($5)
Any2WillDo : Call ($5)
Innocent Bystander : Fold
HERO: Call ($5)
HERO: Check
Victim: Bet ($10)
Any2WillDo : Call ($10)
HERO: Call ($10)
HERO: Check
Victim: Bet ($10)
Any2WillDo : Call ($10)
HERO: Raise ($20)
Victim: Raise ($20)
Any2WillDo : Fold
HERO: Raise ($20)
Victim: Call ($10)
Pot: $152 | Rake: $3
Board: [ 9s 8c 9c 4s 2s ]
Seat 1 didn't bet (folded)
Any2WillDo lost $30 (folded)
Innocent Bystander lost $5 (folded)
HERO bet $60, collected $152, net +$92 (showed hand) [ 9h 8d ] (a full house, nines full of eights)
Seat 5 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6 didn't bet (folded)
Victim lost $60 [ 8s As ] (a flush, ace high)
Seat 8 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 9 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 10 didn't bet (folded)
Posted by: Conan the Librarian
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 5:11 p.m.
Posted by: Tony
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 6:41 a.m.
Posted by: str8jacket
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 9:00 a.m.
Posted by: xxx
Posted on: Monday, 4 June 2001, at 12:03 a.m.
Posted by: xxx
Posted on: Monday, 4 June 2001, at 12:03 a.m.
Posted by: James
Posted on: Thursday, 31 May 2001, at 7:33 p.m.
Posted by: jim browder (jbrowder@totalzone.com)
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 9:39 a.m.
Posted by: Glenn (gdl2@po.cwru.edu)
Posted on: Sunday, 3 June 2001, at 2:58 a.m.
Posted by: bigox (jjw@cblhlaw.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 5 June 2001, at 11:14 a.m.
Posted by: Iverson
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 2:16 a.m.
Posted by: WW
Posted on: Friday, 1 June 2001, at 3:51 a.m.