Full Tilt on Randomness and Audits

[JP]

Later in this game there's 4 left, I WAS chip leader I play 56, end up all in at river. Turn and river are FIVES! He had A5 for a higher kicker but we both had sets of 5's!

Few hands later I went out in 3rd place with a 5
Ah5s, min raise from button. One caller, flop comes
with a FIVE! More important to me though is the 3 hearts
on the flop. He goes all in, of COURSE I have to call this one.
He has 88. They hold, no heart to come. But again, 5's till the end in this one game. Almost HALF the boards had a five and many had two 5's by the river. 3/4 of the boards holding a 5 one was on the flop.

This makes TWO games in a row I was able to easily identify a sequence and exploit it to my advantage. I didn't necesarily play every 5 I had, but I picked out several that the opportunity presented itself. I only lost two hands playing a 5 and one of them I had greater than 50% chance of hitting a A, 5 or heart than him hitting an 8

Full Tilt Poker Game #4081501279: $6 + $0.50 Sit & Go (Turbo) (31013462), Table 1 - 150/300 - No Limit Hold'em - 20:58:05 ET - 2007/11/05
Seat 4: Fugowi (4,640)
Seat 6: Big Don Vito (4,680)
Seat 9: JPcontender (4,180)
Fugowi posts the small blind of 150
Big Don Vito posts the big blind of 300
The button is in seat #9
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to JPcontender [5s Ah]
JPcontender raises to 600
Fugowi calls 450
Big Don Vito folds
*** FLOP *** [2h 5h 3h]
Fugowi bets 4,040, and is all in
JPcontender calls 3,580, and is all in
Fugowi shows [8h 8s]
JPcontender shows [5s Ah]
Uncalled bet of 460 returned to Fugowi
*** TURN *** [2h 5h 3h] [Tc]
*** RIVER *** [2h 5h 3h Tc] [Js]
Fugowi shows a pair of Eights
JPcontender shows a pair of Fives
Fugowi wins the pot (8,660) with a pair of Eights
JPcontender stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 8,660 | Rake 0
Board: [2h 5h 3h Tc Js]
Seat 4: Fugowi (small blind) showed [8h 8s] and won (8,660) with a pair of Eights
Seat 6: Big Don Vito (big blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 9: JPcontender (button) showed [5s Ah] and lost with a pair of Fives

[JP]

hahahha

I just got accused of cheating or colluding because I folded all the time for one player and bet all the time for others and I was winning and playing weird cards.

I guess I was cheating but not the way he made it out. I found another run of cards and played them against some players but not others. I played a few odd combos because of what I felt the sequence was running and they happened to hit. Sometimes it was 7's other times it was 8's and T's. Anyway, again, I found this in a 3rd game and used it to my advantage just like the player reads on who I could bully and who was good to stay away from. I won this game.

Next game I'm in right now I noticed a couple things right away in hand 1 & 2, I thought no way, and didn't play them. Both turned into winners had I played my "hunch" or this "pattern". One boated, the other ended up the winning set IF I went with it. I didn't and am just playing poker. The sequence is more random this time other than the first two back to back I had a "hunch" on. Course, we're only 8 hands in but so far it seems to be a combination of the three prior sequences running in stringed hands back to back, then revert to another sequence. It's not as direct and settled as in the other games above.

[Marty Smith]

I have heard from other players they find FT streaky more than most sites.

[British Bulldog]

I have heard from other players they find FT streaky more than most sites.

I was one of them.

[gadget51]

Just my final thought considering this randomness thing:
Say red cards and black cards are 50/50 to hit on the flop, then even [and especially], if the randomizer is working perfeclty, odd sequences will and should, occur. For example. I have seen 29 blacks in a row hit on a roulette wheel. Perhaps not an acurate analogy but the point is shown. It happens a lot in Omaha High, where I have a double suited hand, only to see the other 2 suits hit time and time again!
Without decending into geekiness, if randomness of the deal is truly random then this has to happen.
Just one last thought: if the game is so biased towards the '5s' hitting, why call a 3xBB raise with 22?

[JP]

I don't remember the exact hand for that 22 but was most likely on the button or in the blind. Holding a low pair, 5's hitting, He likely holds overcards. It's a small risk to take for boat potential or a set against a higher pair or two pair. It is also easy to dump if missed as I did when it was obvious he hit the flop or held better than the flop. Didn't matter, I missed and bailed out. If I was in the blinds, it would have been a discount to me to call, if I was on the button, I had good position to play it or dump however it turned out. I'm also big stack and able to afford a "peek". Little to risk, much to possibly gain.

It is true, you can flip a coin 100 times, it can come up heads 10 times in a row, the next toss is still 50/50 as to what it will be. We are not talking black cards/red cards, even cards/odd cards, we are not talking 38 specific numbers. We are talking about 1,000's of possible combinations occurring in the deal. Streaks do occur, that is a fact. I've played live and been saddled with a 4 or 4's through every hand but 6 in a SNG. In 2 of the hands during that game, a 4 or 4's hit the board. This "streak" is a normal part of poker variance. What is NOT normal, is the frequent occurence of "streaks" or specific "sequences" occuring in the FT deal that makes it readable or predictable to take advantage of it like this.

To be fair, I have not detected anything like this the past couple days. What has been happening as a different type occurence, is that the underdog wins by the river 3 out of 4 times this past couple days. A couple times I was the underdog limping along, most of the times I was the monster betting it out losing on the river to the one card that can beat me. I watched it occur to the other players time and again, it wasn't just happening to me and I wasn't jaded in my opinion because I lost. I watched AK lost to 57, QQ lose to 44, AA with A on board lose to J9 etc...
Yes, this is part of poker and yes it does occur. The difference is that it occurs randomly in poker, yet on FT, it is the most common occurence. I would MUCH rather go into a hand with AQ or AJ than KK or AK for this simple reason. By the river, the AQ will out run the AK or KK over 50% of the time. I'm too busy playing poker and worrying about my own game and strategy to start collecting and collating data on this to get exact numbers for it's occurence. Other than what I normally collect for my game and am able to report about here I'm not inclined to go further with it. If someone has Poker Tracker or Poker Office, perhaps those programs have a way of tracking what you AK or KK loses to and the statistics on it?

Playing on Stars, my AQ loses to the AK or KK, the AA holds up, etc..., it's seems to be a more "normal" deal as it does on Bodog and Doyles room. Unfortunately, my "game" is a bit messed up on those sites because I get used to hands I play on FT I have to remind myself I'm on a different site and it helps on Doyles. I play regular cards and so far stay ahead of the game there. Stars I'm in the bottom levels so suckouts occur more often as more poor players play junk, my br is low so I stay low there. Add in my mistakes and wrong card selection, I don't do well at stars.

Just like learning to play a particular style or different game levels play differently, it is also like that playing at different sites. Playing live, you don't adjust your game based on the casino you go to. You play specific games a specific way and specific oppnonents you deal with a specific way. Yet in online poker, you have to adjust for the game site you play at. Why is that? Some of it is because the player types there, sure, but it's also due to the card generator and game setup. A $5 9 seat SNG at 4 different sites will have different format. If you look at hand audits that sites make available, you will see most sites have very similar "averages" within 3 tenths of a decimal point across the board! The cards are not "random" but "statistically averaged" to have this type consensus. Then there are the couple sites that the numbers are "off". For these "off" sites, there are two types; more random and more sequenced.

[gadget51]

Nice reply jp and quite enlightening; thank you. I agree that some sites sites use a statistically 'typical' method and quite frankly it sucks, not only mathematically, but surely ethically as well? Player's assumptions are that the deal is fair and producing 'typical' results implies interference and hence bias. Not good.

[British Bulldog]

Yet in online poker, you have to adjust for the game site you play at. Why is that? Some of it is because the player types there, sure, but it's also due to the card generator and game setup

If this is the case, then it makes a mockery of the whole game. I play slightly differently on each site because of the texture of the players on the particular site. If you then have to factor in what mood you think the RNG is in then it's time to forget the whole thing.

I refuse to play at FTP. I can prove nothing, but the running sucks. I'm interested in making money, nothing else at all, and it's finally stuck in my thick head that this is all that matters. I couldn't give a monkey's toss about any factor at a poker site other than my earn rate. I've kicked Stars into touch for a while, not because of any suspicions I have, but because my earn rate is less than elsewhere. It is interesting that iPoker is now consistently the 3rd rated network for traffic and the daily averages are beating Full Tilt.

[BaddBeatBobb]

iPoker = InterPoker?

[arcadiaboy]

does this happen everywhere though!

on pkr the other day in half an hour i had AA pre flop 3 times

firstly I flopped the boat, AAAQQ

then AAAJJ

then AAA

the other guys werent happy, typing 'come on!'

but i didnt end there, if i had 33 pre flop the 3 would flop for me and this went on for about 45 mins then the switch apparently went off so i stay and waited a while again

my question for all the pokersites is if its truly random why do we get rushes or the opposite for such time spans?

i remember a TI game where i had KK prefop 4 times,


cant they just have a big ball machine on the lottery LOL, (JOKE)

[JP]

As in live deal, cards are random, run in streaks, switch up, run hot, run cold, etc... But there are statistical numbers long term over what hits or don't hit.

For algorithms to run, it's mathematical, deal is "fixed" based on the program to deal specific "typical" statistical averages over time. The program knows what it's dealt and what should be dealt. How it evolves from that I don't have a clue. Perhaps the program picked out that its deal was missing some statistic point, switched to maintain "XY" cards in "X" hands dealt. Once point reached, it went to it's normal "routine".

SOME programs have that built in, others do not and as BB pointed out, those that incorporate only a logical equation in their routine will not be true random but run on sequence or "typical".

Short term swings are normal in live and online hence overall online can be considered "random". But at some sites more than others. What is NOT normal and what gives cause for concern is the Long Term patterns that have emerged at FT. This "sequencing" is not something that happens rarely and it has not been recent only. I first noticed this about 6 or 7 months ago. It has continued weekly through today. Perhaps it is because I play multiple games daily and am exposed to so much, I see so much and it starts to reveal itself to me rather than to someone that plays a few days a week or less.

Knowing what I believe to be true at FT, I play more cautious and scrutinize the cards for patterns. There is definitely something wrong with their software. Last night, I played 3 SNG's in a particular sequence of a particular type. I was awarded 200 points when it should have been 7 points. I never played those games in that order or combination before. I do not know if the software was confused because of some glitch reading points for games played like that, or if there is some other glitch that happened. I only know I was supposed to receive less than 10 points and instead received 200. Of course I am not going to complain about this mistake. If it were the otherway, then I would say something. I did nothing to receive "free points", did not enter a game for points, did not win either of those 3 games, did not enter any drawing for points and I don't even think they have one.

Software is software, they are programs written by humans, there are bugs that get fixed, patches released, updates and upgrades. Software gets better over time. Companies that change, morph and grow, accept new technologies and implement them, continue to grow. Those that don't fall by the wayside. Sometimes affecting others in a negative way in so doing. The scandal at absolute was not a glitch or a hacker like they tried to pass it off at one point. It was simply a cheater that found a way to bypass safeguards and exploit the software using basically what amounts to monitoring or maintenance software. Unable to be used on it's own for nefarious purposes, it was harmless. But nevertheless, a work around made it possible to still be used to cheat with.

If I knew math, knew algorithms and could figure out the "sequence" consistently, I would have to stop "playing it now and then" and contact someone with the facts to get it corrected. Since it isn't something I can decisively point to and cannot consistently find, there's not much I can do but point out when it happens. For the moment, if I bet on some "sequence" it's nothing more than a gamble it would work that way.

[British Bulldog]

iPoker = InterPoker?

No! iPoker is a network (Noble, Titan, CD, Blue Square, and loads of others).

[BaddBeatBobb]

Given that a clever guy like JP can find and exploit a tendency in FT to his advantage, how many other clever players are doing this? How many are there who do not disclose the advantage they have discovered?

Software is indeed product of human minds, and this is why shuffler audits are a crucial aspect of poker software. Most poker sites are quite public about disclosing their audits. FT is not. It's time for FT to submit its shuffler to an audit, conducted according to generally accepted principles, by a recognized auditor.

[JP]

Hear Hear!

[Marty Smith]

Notwithstanding the excellent research and debate in deep math thinking above, here is what I know:

Far more than any other site I play at, when I am all in and ahead, even dominating my opponent, my physical being cringes into a cocoon of ugly human wrangling in anticipation of being terribly, and utterly sucked into the cavern of Full Tilt's deep dark death dungeon.