Is PartyPoker rigged?

[MEDITANK]

I thought the only fixed things were horse races?:laugh:

 

[Sonny]

I thought the only fixed things were horse races?:laugh:

No, most of the horses are fixed too. :grin:

-Sonny-

 

[GeorgeD]

I thought the only fixed things were horse races?:laugh:

Wrestling?

 

[ScottH]

Wrestling?

What ridiculous accusation are you going to come out with next, Santa Clause isn't real either? :joker:

 

[Kasi]

I need to clean something up, firstly it was not $1000 lost betting $1 per hand in 3500 hands. At times we played 2 hands at once, $2 on each and a rare playing of $4 per hand and playing upto 4 squares (two each)..

I hope when the 2 of u each played 2 hands you didn't count the dealer upcard 4 times.

 

[dacium]

Of course not, when we played same table I only took my hand history.

As for the results, the chance of that distribution was only about 4 standard deviations, and only around 1 in 10,000... so probably just a bad beat

 

[MEDITANK]

No, most of the horses are fixed too. :grin:

-Sonny-

Isn't there a sacred flow of horses?

 

[Sonny]

Isn't there a sacred flow of horses?

People in the horse breeding industry are very familiar with a horse's "sacred flow."

-Sonny-

 

[Kasi]

Of course not, when we played same table I only took my hand history.

As for the results, the chance of that distribution was only about 4 standard deviations, and only around 1 in 10,000... so probably just a bad beat

Ok - you kept saying "we" alot in your first post.

I guess now you're saying you actually played against 3500 separately-dealt dealer upcards, not 3500 hands? (I mean dealt after a round is completed.)

I was just thinking when u played 2 hands against the dealer maybe they'd show up as separate hands and the dealer's upcard might be double-counted.

How does your script recognize when u played 2 hands simultaneously? Or split?

Seriously, if u played against that many dealer upcards, I'd start videotaping every session and/or getting logs.

I just can't see it as possible in a fair game.

 

[GeorgeD]

What ridiculous accusation are you going to come out with next, Santa Clause isn't real either? :joker:

Of course not. Santa wrestles during the off season.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZrCly9r0YY

 

[Kasi]

Of course not, when we played same table I only took my hand history.

As for the results, the chance of that distribution was only about 4 standard deviations, and only around 1 in 10,000... so probably just a bad beat

I don't get it.

You've gone from 15+ standard deviations to about 4?

How did u arrive at either? What changed?

The results u originally stated are simply not possible in a fairly dealt game, at least the way I understand it.

I take it u disagree with Ken's analysis? Which, by the way I agree with, except for the typo of 395 instead of 305 for Kings. But still zero.

Please clarify if u can - I get a little ballistic with accusations like this - so easy to make, so hard to prove.

But, still, nice to know, for whatever reason, you are retracting your original accusation entirely.

I hope they change the title of this thread and add "-NOT". Or something.

 

[dacium]

I never said SD of 15 or 7. That was assuming i lost $1,000 betting $1 a hand in 3600 hands which didn't happen.

The distrubtion of dealers up cards is about 1 in 12,500 which is basically 0.00008.

 

[ScottH]

The distrubtion of dealers up cards is about 1 in 12,500 which is basically 0.00008.

Here is the results Ken got for the probability of that dealer upcard distribution.

Since the online calculator returned a value of zero, I decided to run this test in Excel instead. The result?
1.2094E-40, or
0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000012094
This is quite likely beyond any meaningful precision limits of Excel, so just call it ZERO.

A second independent set of data would be quite useful to see.

Although like he says, that is most probably beyond the precision limits of excel, so those numbers at the end would not be scientifically significant, so it would just be 0.

 

[Kasi]

I never said SD of 15 or 7. That was assuming i lost $1,000 betting $1 a hand in 3600 hands which didn't happen.

The distrubtion of dealers up cards is about 1 in 12,500 which is basically 0.00008.

No problem. I was just wondering how u get the 1 in 12,500 figure or there abouts.

Maybe just talking about 1 card maybe?

Has any of ur original data changed?

Just curious - not trying to bust ur balls or anything - I gotta learn too.

PM me if u want.

 

[dacium]

for example 234 cards and a chance of 1/13 of drawing a card makes variance (234*1/13*12/13) =~ 16, so standard deviation is about 4.

4 standard deviations is norm dist is 99.99366575163% or 1 in 15786

Where to go from here I don't know...
the probability could be anywhere between 1 in 15786 and 1 in 15786^13 but you have to be careful not to fall into the whole of calculating the probability to specifically. For example calculating the exact probability of these numbers does actually mean anything, we have to know how to get this average standard deviation or worse.

 

[Kasi]

for example 234 cards and a chance of 1/13 of drawing a card makes variance (234*1/13*12/13) =~ 16, so standard deviation is about 4.

4 standard deviations is norm dist is 99.99366575163% or 1 in 15786

Thanks for replying.

234 cards with a 1/13 chance= 3024 cards in total?

Still don't get the magic of 234?

In any case I think we're trying to figure out the chances of that total distribution of dealer upcards in a fair game.

What is your problem with Ken's analysis? (Maybe that's another way to approach it.)

Are u sure ur perl script or whatever did not count splits as 2 hands? That when u played 2 hands u did not double count the dealer upcard?

Did u ever do the number of dealer BJ's thing?