AKo VS KQs at Ladbrokes poker

[dermatu]

raise on the turn !?

[gundsala]

All these posts are extremely interesting,i have been playin poker for about 10 years now and would say over the years i have probably broken even...maybe lost a wee bit however wot i always seem to notice on any poker site i play on,that whenever i cash out my winnings i go on these terrible losings streaks and seem to end up losing the money that i've won.there is something defo dodgy goin on with these online poker sites and i think the truth will come out soon.scamming thiefs!!!!!!

[MCFoultier]

be a man and checkraise the turn. or checkfold the flop. or three-bet preflop. or lead the turn. or lead-fold the river. do anything but this cowardly check-calling line here. i personally would threebet preflop, or if i flat, check fold the flop.

[BigEricHunt]

Incidentally, I've just joined Corals (Ongame) and won my first tournament; a 30 player $5 buy-in SNG. This was in spite of the software crashing when the blinds were 300/600 & losing half my stack while re-booting. Beginner's luck or beginner's lucky algorithm?

When I closed my account with Winner (iPoker) after a series of diabolical bad beats that threw me on tilt, they urged me to take a short break rather than self-exclude - saying that my luck would probably change when I came back.

Hmm.

[BigEricHunt]

@ZEDZOR2 Indeed, my luck didn't last long, and I repeatedly busted out on the bubble when odds were significantly in my favour. I made dozens of excellent reads & traps against recklessly aggressive opponents only to be fisted by the software time and time again. These bad beats didn't "even themselves out" as the shills like to argue: The laws of probability only applied when I was trapped with inferior hands (no miracle outers for me) and 80% of big coin flips went the way of my opponents.

[BigEricHunt]

In my opinion, online poker is no more random than a poker machine in an amusement arcade. Players who make a profit out of online poker have cracked the system - in the same way as cracking a computer game i.e. knowing when the monsters (bad beats) are due, and working out how to dodge them or inflict them on other opponents. Naturally, they will attribute their shark status to superior poker skill - thereby perpetuating the myth that anyone can make a profit through improving their game.

[BigEricHunt]

After the Absolute scandal, on-line poker sites implemented anti-hacking/anti-collusion algorithms to make outcomes less predictable - and hence reduce the potential for cheating. The problem, however, is that less predictability is only achievable by delivering more bad beats, and as the software can't distinguish between cheats and players on a roll, the bad beats are distributed indiscriminately.

I can't prove any of this. But the use of these algorithms are widely reported on the internet.

[MatteNoob]

@BigEricHunt it seems plausible, and especially since the side effect is to distribute money amongst players and have them keep playing instead of cashing out. The most unfair thing about online poker is the rake to pot ratio. If you have a 25nl game, a 50 pot will generate 3 rake, however in a 2knl game a pot of 4k will also only generate 3 of rake. This means small stakes players are more profitable than the bigger games, and the bigger games are only played to get people in to play small stak

[MatteNoob]

@BigEricHunt part 2: I have read your comments here, and they all seem rational. I've played poker off and on for about 7 years, and I'm better than ever before, but still can't beat the rake by much. During a 6 month period I played about 10 hours a day and studied the game for another 4-5 hours, slept the rest. During this period I was able to convert $1000 to $2000. I tracked everything and found that my biggest losses came with big hands that got crushed in bad beats.

[MatteNoob]

@BigEricHunt part 3: I'm certain that my winnings would have been much higher had it not been for the setups I encountered. I did great table selection and had great notes plus lists of fish. However this didn't help, because every time I won 2-3x the buyin a fish at the table had the same stack size and won against me with a badbeat, like me AA vs him KK. Take this video of me for instance, this was all during the same session! RKyHOTehPEw

[Minsheme]

@BigEricHunt Very well put, I've always seen it like that, just wouldn't know how to put it down in words like you did.

[BigEricHunt]

There are plenty of bad players in on line poker, and perhaps I'm one of them. But if it's the same as live poker - only 5 times as fast - then bad players should get busted more quickly, realise they are shit, and never re-deposit again. But this isn't the case. The software, both by default and design, enables bad players to finish in the money more often - hence encouraging them to work at their game, keep generating rake and keep re-depositing.

[BigEricHunt]

All on-line poker sites are rigged for action & rake. MicroGaming (which includes Ladbrokes) is no different from any other network when it comes to ridiculously contrived action set ups and miracle suck out cards. However, they don't seem too bothered when it comes to maximising rake, and are happy to fuck you over with their ghost bots and have you re-depositing in the shortest possible time. I guess this explains why traffic is so low on the MicroGaming network....???

[alexnzxVersion2]

@BigEricHunt lol rigged, what a sad excuse for people who are just shit, I have been playing poker online for years and i don't think its rigged, not one bit.

[BigEricHunt]

@alexnzxVersion2 You are either an industry shill or you've cracked a method of beating the software. Either way, it's in your interest to put it all down to skill; to encourage "shit" players to improve their game and hence keep re-depositing. After 1000+ SNGs I am infinitely more skillful than when I was a noobie - yet I'm still hovering around the rake line in $5 & $10 buy ins. Can you think of any other "skill" based activity where 1000+ hours of practice results in no improvement? I can't.

[BigEricHunt]

@alexnzxVersion2 The software is rigged by default: The RNG is only capable of reproducing one trillionth of all potential shuffles. It is also deterministic, so it can never be "random". Algorithms and sub-routines are added to distribute hands evenly and to deliver losing hands to cheaters and hackers.

Sounds fair, but what does this all mean to the average on-line poker player? More action hands. More suck outs. Less probability of strong hands holding up. Less skill involved.

[alexnzxVersion2]

@BigEricHunt LOL this is all what you believe, no online poker site is rigged whatsoever, you just play 5 times as many hands as you would in a live game so obviously bad beats are more frequent. If you claim it is rigged it just means you are a bad player and can't win money online. I have been playing online for a long time and have got bad beats, it doesn't matter if you have good bankroll managment.

[TheP0kerStar]

First of all in my opinion you should re-raise him with AK in 6-max, and when you got the ace on turn you should too re-raise because you had top pair and straight draw also.

Poor poker.

[coolbluezzzz]

well i hope this teaches you something .... never bet on an ace/ king if your beaten after the flop ..thats just poor poker

you knew you were beaten before the last bet because you unchecked the muck box

which meant you paid him £4 even though you knew you were beat but you wanted to show him it was close

[pelnutrauks]

Calling station :)

[szwandtuk]

Wow.. You're shit.