|
FreeRider
|
08-23-2007, 03:27 AM
Post subject: Full Tilt Poker Non Scientific Study
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Tahoe
Posts: 18
|
|
So, I'm probably going to get flamed for this post. But, I think what I have to say is important so here goes...
I have been wondering a lot lately as to the merit of claims that Full T.ilt P0ker is rigged. So I played 100 low stakes sit & go tournaments over the course of 8 days(50, $2+ .25 and 50, $5 + .50 NON TURBO) and religiously logged the data. I was only interested in keeping track of one thing; I wanted to see how many times the shorter stack won/lost when raising/calling all in preflop against a larger stacked opponent(races). I ONLY recorded data for 1 on 1(heads up) races. Here is my data:
Total races recorded: 382
Total races won by shorter stacks 64 (17%)
Total races won by higher stacks 318 (83%)
Total number of times shorter stacks were leading preflop: 205 (53%)
Total number of times higher stacks were leading preflop: 177 (46%)
I'd say these stats are pretty suggestive, what do you guys think? I definitely DON'T think there are "bots" that rip people off. But I DO think there might be incentive for a site to speed things along by offing the short stacks in tournaments after doing this experiment.
Has anyone else kept detailed records like this before? Were your findings similar?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
givememyleg
|
|
WHO YA GONNA CALL?!??
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
Posts: 5,042
|
|
I sure hope that you're the one who voted "Yes"
Also, I've seen people win the lottery. The odds are only something like 1:175,711,536. Man is life ever rigged or what?
|

Get your own badge! Click profile at the top and FTR Badge from the left nav.
"The Dragon in My Garage" by Carl Sagan
I say onto you, I've felt the dragon! I felt the touch of his tail, the breath of his fire, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that the dragon exists!
|
|
badgers
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Spewing
Posts: 3,372
|
|
I know!!! So rigged! All the time there's a big stack and a little stack, they say it's a coinflip but when the bigstack loses he stays in, when the short stack loses he is knocked out!?!?! Clearly rigged.
[/flame]
Real answer: NO!!! You think they'd risk the integrity of their company to save a (comparitively) miniscule amount of bandwidth? Once you have a sample size of 10,000+ I might read your stats...
|
|
|
|
sinky
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SCOTLAND
Posts: 295
|
|
yawn
|
|
|
|
FreeRider
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Tahoe
Posts: 18
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by givememyleg
I sure hope that you're the one who voted "Yes"
Also, I've seen people win the lottery. The odds are only something like 1:175,711,536. Man is life ever rigged or what?
|
I didn't vote, I already know what I think, I was curious to find out what others think. You, and the other people who have replied thus far, should probably READ my post. From your replies, it doesn't appear that any of you got beyond the title. Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Eric
|
08-23-2007, 08:29 PM
Post subject: Re: [url=http://www.flopturnriver.com/Referrals/Full-Tilt.ht
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: on my laptop
Posts: 1,782
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FreeRider
I wanted to see how many times the shorter stack won/lost when raising/calling all in preflop against a larger stacked opponent(races). I ONLY recorded data for 1 on 1(heads up) races.
|
It isn't rigged.
The short stacks have lower M than the larger stacks. Per HOH2, short stacks are supposed to shove with any 2 cards if their M is less than 5 and they are first to enter a pot. Players shoving with any 2 cards are going to lose showdowns more often than the players calling them with better hands.
|
|
|
|
FreeRider
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Tahoe
Posts: 18
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by badgers
Real answer: NO!!! You think they'd risk the integrity of their company to save a (comparitively) miniscule amount of bandwidth? Once you have a sample size of 10,000+ I might read your stats...
|
Who said anything about saving bandwidth? I'm suggesting that they might speed things up to make more money. I don't have the resources to have a sample size of 10,000 hands. 382 hands is a small population but look at the numbers. 17% ?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
bode
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2006
Location: slow motion
Posts: 4,270
|
|
sample size.
j/k, obv r1gg3d!!!1!!shiftone!!
|
Quote:
|
eeevees are not monies yet...they are like baby monies.
|
|
|
FreeRider
|
08-23-2007, 08:35 PM
Post subject: Re: [url=http://www.flopturnriver.com/Referrals/Full-Tilt.ht
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Tahoe
Posts: 18
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eric
It isn't rigged.
The short stacks have lower M than the larger stacks. Per HOH2, short stacks are supposed to shove with any 2 cards if their M is less than 5 and they are first to enter a pot. Players shoving with any 2 cards are going to lose showdowns more often than the players calling them with better hands.
|
Total number of times shorter stacks were leading preflop: 205 (53%)
Total number of times higher stacks were leading preflop: 177 (46%)
|
|
|
|
Eric
|
08-23-2007, 08:41 PM
Post subject: Re: [url=http://www.flopturnriver.com/Referrals/Full-Tilt.ht
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: on my laptop
Posts: 1,782
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FreeRider
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eric
It isn't rigged.
The short stacks have lower M than the larger stacks. Per HOH2, short stacks are supposed to shove with any 2 cards if their M is less than 5 and they are first to enter a pot. Players shoving with any 2 cards are going to lose showdowns more often than the players calling them with better hands.
|
Total number of times shorter stacks were leading preflop: 205 (53%)
Total number of times higher stacks were leading preflop: 177 (46%)
|
I'm speaking in general terms. The sample size in this specific example is way, way too small.
|
|
|
|
drtofu66
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 595
|
|
Being 'ahead' is not always created equal. You're giving AK vs AA (AK is a 15:1 dog) the same weight as KJ vs QTs (QTs is a 1.6:1 dog) by your method. If these are all heavy favorites being beaten, then yeah-- that ain't right. If it's KQ beating 33 53% of the time in your sample it's still in the range of chance and you'd need a much larger sample size to prove your hypothesis.
|
|
|
|
Jack Sawyer
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Old School
Posts: 2,535
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sinky
yawn
|
|
My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...

Quote:
|
VHS is like a book and a book is like a stack of kindles.
|
Hey, I'm in a movie!
http://youtu.be/lGdnIrRKDTI
|
|
Halv
|
|
pro crastinator
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: No hindsight for the blind.
Posts: 1,842
|
|
Wee, I was the first "Maybe" voter!
There's a tiny chance that any site is rigged. Op, gather a significant sample size and post again, preferably with pretty graphs. I guess something like 100k races would be ok for starters?
Also, what DrTofu said.
|
|
|
|
Jack Sawyer
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Old School
Posts: 2,535
|
|
Omg! Site X is RIGG3D! That's why I'm losing so much! OMG! OMG!
Hang on, I guess I can't handle losing. I guess that when I lose, I'll start looking for every possibility that there is some greater reason that I lost. I guess I should quit playing poker altogether, and engage more, uhm, passive activities, such as planting trees. At least I can't "lose" planting trees, right?
Oh wait! Fertilizer X makes my neighbours trees grow faster! And more beautiful too! Fertilizer X is RIGG3D! OMG! OMG!
|
My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...

Quote:
|
VHS is like a book and a book is like a stack of kindles.
|
Hey, I'm in a movie!
http://youtu.be/lGdnIrRKDTI
|
|
givememyleg
|
|
WHO YA GONNA CALL?!??
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
Posts: 5,042
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FreeRider
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by givememyleg
I sure hope that you're the one who voted "Yes"
Also, I've seen people win the lottery. The odds are only something like 1:175,711,536. Man is life ever rigged or what?
|
I didn't vote, I already know what I think, I was curious to find out what others think. You, and the other people who have replied thus far, should probably READ my post. From your replies, it doesn't appear that any of you got beyond the title. Cheers.
|
you do realize that there are probably more than 382 races happening in one second at ftp right?
|

Get your own badge! Click profile at the top and FTR Badge from the left nav.
"The Dragon in My Garage" by Carl Sagan
I say onto you, I've felt the dragon! I felt the touch of his tail, the breath of his fire, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that the dragon exists!
|
|
givememyleg
|
|
WHO YA GONNA CALL?!??
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
Posts: 5,042
|
|
Also, make a scientific study for better results.
|

Get your own badge! Click profile at the top and FTR Badge from the left nav.
"The Dragon in My Garage" by Carl Sagan
I say onto you, I've felt the dragon! I felt the touch of his tail, the breath of his fire, and I know without a shadow of a doubt that the dragon exists!
|
|
FreeRider
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Tahoe
Posts: 18
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
Omg! Site X is RIGG3D! That's why I'm losing so much! OMG! OMG!
Hang on, I guess I can't handle losing. I guess that when I lose, I'll start looking for every possibility that there is some greater reason that I lost. I guess I should quit playing poker altogether, and engage more, uhm, passive activities, such as planting trees. At least I can't "lose" planting trees, right?
Oh wait! Fertilizer X makes my neighbours trees grow faster! And more beautiful too! Fertilizer X is RIGG3D! OMG! OMG!
|
Yawn...
|
|
|
|
FreeRider
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South Tahoe
Posts: 18
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by givememyleg
Also, make a scientific study for better results.
|
I'm really not all that interested in designing a scientific study, writing a program or reporting my results with fancy graphs. I'm just a guy who had a conversation with somebody who was convincing and set out to keep track of hand history's in the course of 100 tourneys and reported my findings. Take it or leave it.
And, it's interesting how everyone presumes those who suspect poker sites of using unethical tactics for making more money are always branded as losers by the "devoted" despite the fact that it is illegal for most of us to be playing at these sites in the first place and therefore poker sites have to lie to our banks to even get our money deposited. My last deposit was charged as a flower shop purchase! Anyway, I play pretty well and more often than not finish in the money. Maybe you should come find me at joker stars or FTP under the name CWJ3405 and play a game with me before you assume I suck. You'll find me at the low stakes tournaments and ring games.
|
|
|
|
Zee Devee
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 694
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FreeRider
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by badgers
Real answer: NO!!! You think they'd risk the integrity of their company to save a (comparitively) miniscule amount of bandwidth? Once you have a sample size of 10,000+ I might read your stats...
|
Who said anything about saving bandwidth? I'm suggesting that they might speed things up to make more money. I don't have the resources to have a sample size of 10,000 hands. 382 hands is a small population but look at the numbers. 17% ?!?!?!
|
How would speeding things up make them more money if it wasn't for creating more bandwidth?
Also (this is the same point as drtofu just worded differently)"
if you really want to know about races, you need to seperate them into groups. Example:
Lets say bigstack has AA and shortstack has KK. Shortstack is a 80-20 dog here and lets say he pulls the set. Then the stats become:
Bigstack- 0
Smallstack-1
Bigstack ahead pf- 1
Smallstack ahead pf- 0
Now lets say you run into your "flips" 49 more times, but these are all 55-45's (a lower pp vs. 2 high cards).
Lets say the small stack had a pp 30 of those times, and the bigstack had 19. (For simplicity reasons I am going to split the results in half) the bigstack won 25 and the smallstack won 24.
Now the stats look like this:
Bigstack-26
Smallstack-24
Bigstack ahead pf-20
Smallstack ahead pf-30
Over the course of your "experiment" the times you get huge odds against something and the times you get very small odds against something are weighed the same, which is not right at all.
Another way you could go about this is using Slansky bucks in comparison to real bucks (chips in this case but whatever). If you find the equity for the small stack and the equity for the large stack and they are way off the results (over a decent sample size) then you may have some proof.
But for now there is really nothing of substance here.
|
|
|
|
Seasider
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bangor UK
Posts: 563
|
|
Full Tilt Poker non-scientific fact - I have just played a $5 S&G when I got in on Fri night and the first person bust out when the bb was at 120! The short stacks couldnt get knocked out if they tried, I got AI with KK, hit a set and split when the board hit a straight.
LOL RIGGED!!!!
|
|
|
|
Jack Sawyer
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Old School
Posts: 2,535
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FreeRider
Anyway, I play pretty well and more often than not finish in the money. Maybe you should come find me at joker stars or FTP under the name CWJ3405 and play a game with me before you assume I suck.
|
It has never been a personal attack on you.
Nobody has a vested interested in playing you and beat you.
This "its rigged" thing has been discussed ad nausea already, and time and time again it has been disproven. There was that one time, with the bad RNG, but that is already in the past and the site in question is dead and buried.
Why not rigged? Imagine: for the marginal extra profits that "its rigged" backers claim, online poker sites may lose their whole customer base if it is proved its rigged. Now, for a few (or maybe even a lot) of extra dollars, you run the risk of losing your whole business (which means no income at all).
Do you see the big picture?
|
My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...

Quote:
|
VHS is like a book and a book is like a stack of kindles.
|
Hey, I'm in a movie!
http://youtu.be/lGdnIrRKDTI
|