blonde poker forum

 This is a bad beat and i dont apologise for it , quite frankly im getting sick of it.

** Game ID 690510612 starting - 2007-02-18 11:06:50
** Nou Camp [Hold 'em] (20.00|40.00 No Limit - STT) Real Money

- laxen71 sitting in seat 1 with $1460.00
- Jack2310 sitting in seat 2 with $1500.00
- jimmymk sitting in seat 3 with $1580.00 [Dealer]
- jacko-10 sitting in seat 4 with $1470.00
- Arnot3 sitting in seat 5 with $1460.00

jacko-10 posted the small blind - $10.00
Arnot3 posted the big blind - $20.00

** Dealing card to Jack2310:  Kh Jh
laxen71 called - $20.00
Jack2310 raised - $80.00
jimmymk called - $80.00
jacko-10 called - $80.00
Arnot3 folded
laxen71 called - $80.00

** Dealing the flop:  Kc 6h 4h
jacko-10 checked
laxen71 bet - $170.00
Jack2310 called - $170.00
jimmymk folded
jacko-10 folded

** Dealing the turn:  7c

laxen71 bet - $340.00
Jack2310 went all-in - $1250.00
laxen71 went all-in - $870.00
laxen71 shows:  8h 6c

** Dealing the river:  5c

laxen71 wins $3100.00 from the main pot

End of game 690510612

 wtf ?

 really pathetic

 

i hate getting all the money in the middle before the flop on prima i swear you have to win the pot before the river.

Hard to bear sometimes, but you need to, it'll always happen, for & against. But why is this Ladbrokes fault? ("Ladjokes")

why are you not raising on the flop ?

Because he wants to be outdrawn. Obv.

 happenning more and more on Ladbrokes , most players who play there regularly will agree .

 i was fairly confident i was ahead , there is more than one way to play a hand after the flop and on this occasion i knew he was weak.

 i guess im banking on him not calling all his chips with a gutshot draw and 1 card to come.
 

So let me get this straight, you think Ladbrokes is bias/fixed so that the worst hand wins too often?

 no im saying , ive seen more suckouts  / 1 outers / river gutshots and other calamities since the software changed

 things you wouldnt see playing live every night for 10 years

 and i dont care what anyone says , at the end of the day , it is a computer , no one can convince me that it is fixed , but no-one can say that it is %100 not fixed

happenning more and more on Ladbrokes , most players who play there regularly will agree

You are not seriously saying that Ladbrokes fix it so you,  & others, lose, are you? And their motive?......

They fixed the software so that the worst hand wins? Why would they do that?

And it does not happen Live? Try reading the Walsall Live Update!

 see my reply ^ before you dive in Tony

I'm not diving in mate, I just found it extraordinary that you could think the way you are - it will harm your game if you really think that way.

I have no flag to fly for Ladbrokes, but I see the "joke" comment time & time again when someone gets sucked out, on all & every site & network, & if I lived to be 100, I'll never understand what the point of saying "ladbrokes/tribreca/Stars are a joke" is. Poker generates suckouts, it's in the very nature of the game! Why blame the Site for the way the Poker Gods spin their magic?

 im not blaming the sites for the nature of the game , im saying you see far more dodgy suckouts , runner runner , gutshots , 1 outers etc etc than you see in live action.

 ive played poker for 3 years live and could count on 2 hands the number of really unbelievable beats etc ive seen.

 but ive probably seen more in one night on internet poker than i ave seen live total.

 and its not just Ladbrokes ( although that is my main site of play ) but ive experienced it on all the others as well.

 im more confident playing live , when your fate is in the hands of a computer it is a different story.

One of the reason for the suckouts on Ladbrokes is that the standard of players is poorer than elsewhere on the internet, in my experience. All this talk of new software and more suckout is coincedence at best.

As Tikay says why would a company who has its main customer base in its betting site, be risking any doubt about the integrity of their poker site. Just accept that you are running bad and be happy you are still getting your money in ahead.

Just won a stt on Laddies, so there may be something with regards to the standard of players.
 :)up

Just out of interest I think his chances of winning on the river were not much difference to say a preflop all in move of
 Qc Qd
versus
 Kd Ks
Just mention this to put it in to context and that out of every 100 times this move is made he would win 18 times as he still had seven outs.
Sure this info will probably not make you feel any better. Sorry  :)up

So many things go wrong on Ladbrokes on a regular basis, is it so incredible that someone might lose confidence on the quality of their rng?  If their software is consistently faulty where it can be observed, what could be going on unobserved? 

http://www.ladbrokespoker.com/images/pwc_letter-october2006.gif

The RNG is independently audited, although for those conspiracy theorists amongst you, the last statistical analysis they are showing on the records was from October '06.

What have they been up to since then? (cue spooky music!)

come on mate this is ladbrokes not pokerfix.com

Why don't you just play somewhere else or try to get it in from behind?

For every long shot that comes in on the river that someone loses from, someone wins from the same card.

So by saying the site is rigged "against" me or some other player, you are implicitly saying it is rigged "for" some players.

Now as people are getting "good" beats and "bad" beats in equal measure, why do you only hear from the people who are getting the "bad" beats?

Unless you think people might be predisposed to remember the ropey pieces of luck they have and ignore the times when they get lucky? Maybe??

It's nasty when you go on a bad run. You got 8 outed in the hand you showed. I got one outed twice in 3 hands about a month ago. That's about a million times(havent done the working - GFY) worse than your beat but I still don't put it down to the site being rigged.

(notice how i surreptitiously slip my bad beat story into a post berating bad beats - that's talent)

In the words of Bill Fillmaff bad players sometimes win due to "random fluctuations of dumb luck." You need the beats to be there. It shows there is a luck element to the game. The same luck element that attracts lots of bad players in to throw their money away. Which makes the game profitable if you're good.

So you see, the bad beats actually make you money. You dig?

 

Online poker is rigged.

(http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ikonboard311/non-cgi/emoticons/goodnight.gif)

 :goodpost:

You also see a hell of a lot more hands online and therefore a hell of a lot more beats...

Your comedic talent is wasted on here Snoops!!

 ;smackedbottom;

Maybe you need to look at how you played the hand - rather than blame the site. You've raised in early position with KJ suited but then got 4 callers (yes its only a 5 seater sng but you now have to be worried that your hand isn't the best).

Then you hit as good a flop as you possibly could - but then just flat call the bet. Yes you then reraise on the turn and his call with low pair no kicker with a gutshot draw isn't very good but still i'd rather have players making plays like this every day as it means in the long run i'll make more money.

In the link below is a post i made a long while back, ok its more geared around mtt's but the principles still apply. At the end of the day it isnt Ladbrokes fault that Laxen71 is willing to put all his chips in with 3rd pair and a gutshot - but i'm sure if someone were to add up the number of times he made this move and the number of times he won it would be somewhere around the 18% mark.

Yes as poor as the call looks - you will lose this hand 1 in every 5 times that someone makes a call like this against you.

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=4182.0

Lets say you are cruisin along in a tourney, and you are about 30th out of 40 left in a tourney, and you are seriously looking to double up.

You get AK, go all in, and are called by AQ. Woohoo, you win. You now have 40k chips and are sitting on an average stack.

Next hand, AK again. Sweet!!! There is a raise up front, and you decide to take it down with an all in bet. But wait, your opponent, who has you covered, calls you with... AJ? What a horrible call, right? Yes, it is, and he pays for it when a K flops and you take down the pot. Unreal!!! from 20k to 80k in 2 hands. Sweet!

Next hand, youre in the SB, and you get, holy moly, AK, again... it folds around to you, and you face the BB, who happens to be the chipleader of the tourney at a whopping 175k chips. He has been steamrolling everyone and has a huge lead over the field. What do you do? You know he could bust you if you let him catch anything on the flop, so you dont really want to mess with him... you cant fold AK though, so you push it all in hoping he folds...he thinks, thinks, thinks, and calls...with AQ!!!! He (or course!!!) spikes a Q and you are taking a walk thinking about what an awful beat you took and how this always happens to you.... i mean, THIS IS TOTAL RUBBISH RIGHT? I ALWAYS GET SCREWED.....

WRONG. you are thinking about it in the wrong way.... You were all in 3 times with a 70% chance to win everytime. All you have to do is lose 1 out of 3 to be out of the tournament. Lets let the god of statistics speak to us now:

Winning 3 of 3 ---> .7x.7x.7 = .343

Thats right, only 34% of the time you are still in this tourney after that string of hands, and yet somehow people still think that they "got screwed by pokerstars/willhill/ladbrokes"... How reasonable is it to think that? Answer: Not Very.

The simple fact of the matter is that being all in is a risky proposition, and risk is what you want to avoid in tournaments until you absolutely have to face it. This is why racing early in a tournament is just plain foolish, and yet bad players do it constantly.

Whenever you are all in and not holding the absolute nuts with no cards to come, there is a chance you can get eliminated. Add up those small chances to get eliminated over the course of the tourney and it proves that it is very likely you will be eliminated somewhere.

Same is true of a live game, no one can say 100% that it isn't fixed.

Very true in fact i would trust any game on the internet over alot of the side game played in casinos round the country every night,

Can some1 make a chauvinistic joke to justify the title of the thread  ;nanana;

Why do women get married in white?
No prizes for first correct answer.
Judges decision is final.
No correspondence will be entered into.

maybe thats why i'm still single - 90% of everything in my kitchen is pine / cream. :(

Maybe you are just not a very good player?

Would it be something to do with kitchen appliances

I missed a rule family members are not eligible for entry.

In a good mood today? ;popcorn;

No it's just my standard response to players who think online poker is bent. Usually because they are capable of beating the local £10 rebuy they think they are good, when infact online they are playing better players.

Yer reckon? Have you ever played against Kev in a blonde tourney when he's got the lever.

Playing in a tourney last night on PokerStars (1,000+ runners), and with about 110 left I get crippled down to about 2,000 chips which is 2xBB.  Oh yes, I'm in the BB next hand.  Hoping for a monster, instead I get 48o.  Nice.

I push all-in, and get 4 callers!  So I'm out of my virtual chair.  Flop comes 4K3 - so I reckon I'm dead.  One of the players raises, gets one caller, and they check to the river.  They both show AQ and I quintuple up (is that a word?).  So I'm still short-stacked but back from the dead.  Then I get the best run of cards I've ever seen, I outdraw when I'm behind, hold when I'm ahead, and somehow manage to get to the final table.

Due to the structure, even when I manage to get the chip lead, I'm still short-stacked and so it's going to come down to a lot of luck.  My QQ came up against KK, and then I lost a few close ones to go out in 6th.  My Dad was watching and said 'unlucky' via MSN.  I replied that I'd had more luck going my way in that tourney than I've ever had before.  But it's the QQ v KK that stood out as being 'unfortunate'.  If I'd had the kings, or a different hand, who knows - maybe I'd have won it? 

I'm not going to linger on that at all.  I had no right to still be in the tournament at that stage,  I know that I was the lucky one.  I'm going to make sure I remember this one the next time I'm bemoaning the cards I'm dealt and my next bad beat. 

Online poker is rigged thread # 1,923,412 - LOL

BigTomotoes, did you see the 9/11 conspiracies program on BBC2 last night?

Don't tell me! it was the same guys who built the laddies rng  :dontask:

Yes, on the grassy knoll.

No-one is 100% sure that Colchester Kev isn't a girl.

He's a bloody ugly one if he is.

She's a bloody ugly one if she is.

I saw a conspiracies programme yesterday that stated the titanic never sunk it was in fact the olympic which sunk(never heard of this one before but i'm convinced it was the aliens that did it now)

Now that was mf funny!!!

 did you see his call ? i wouldnt say that was the sign of a better player


 maybe , one of the reasons we use this site , so we can all try to be as good as you

 
 no , was it any good ? changed your mind yet ?

This is the WHOLE issue, encapsulated here....

did you see his call ? i wouldnt say that was the sign of a better player

Do you want bad calls, or not? Of COURSE you do. But you can't have it both ways! If you bet the flop strong - it was a dream flop for you - he goes away. But you don't get paid much. You play it slow, legitimately, to rack up the reward, & end up racking up the risk too. That's how poker works.

I'm still trying to figure how anyone on God's earth could think this is Ladbrokes fault.

Who'd run a poker room, eh?

@ Kinboshi - you deserved to win with the 84 mate for getting em in first. Calling with AQ and others in the pot is not great, the overcall is laughable. Well done mate (and UL with the QQ :D )


BT; You will see far more outdraws on line than live for some very basic reasons, none of which relate to the 'rig':

i) you play more hands, tables and tournaments
ii) players who play live are there purely to play the game and for teh social aspect, on line they are often not concentrating, usually chatting, surfing the web, multi-tabling, watching tv, p*ssed etc
iii) more opponents will chase the river and therefore increase the chances of that outdraw (anonymity has something to do with this - be embarrassed to call it live). Therefore, the gutshot chasers may put it down more often live, for fear of being ridiculed by their peers.

All you can do is get your money/chips in when you have the best of it and hope it holds. If his hand was face up, ask yourself if you wanted him to call? If the answer is yes, then take it on the chin and move on. Bad runs are horrible, take a break if it is messing with you, because it is simply impossible to play good poker and make good decisions when you are in the mode of believing the world is against you - any edge you may have is gone.

Look at your poker tracker statistics and compare them with the 'expected results'. That should tell you if the software is miles out for you. I sincerely doubt it, but if you are concerned at least back it up with facts and not one hand!

***If you think you're running badly, then check this out and put things into perspective!

**link removed - sorry**

'encapsculated'

I like that! My mission today will be to incorporate that within an email today. Every day on Blonde is a learning day :D

Sorry - link removed. I didn't realise as it was from a rival site.

Anyhow, the basics of the hand were that player A lost a $100k pot with Th Tc on a Td Ts 7h board against 8h 6h

The turn was 5h and the river 4h  99.8% on the flop

Well remove the spelling error I made - I have!

Disappointingly I thought it was a new word. I looked it up on Wikipedia and it did indeed offer me your corrected version. A shame, I like new words.

Table Vasari (heads up) - $200/$400 - No Limit Hold'em - 14:21:11 ET - 2007/02/19
Seat 1: Son-in-Law ($67,608.75)
Seat 2: durrrr ($77,241.75)
durrrr posts the small blind of $200
Son-in-Law posts the big blind of $400
The button is in seat #2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
durrrr raises to $1,200
Son-in-Law raises to $3,600
durrrr calls $2,400
*** FLOP *** [Td Ts 7h]
Son-in-Law bets $5,000
durrrr raises to $15,700
Son-in-Law calls $10,700
*** TURN *** [Td Ts 7h] [5h]
Son-in-Law checks
durrrr has 15 seconds left to act
durrrr bets $57,941.75, and is all in
Son-in-Law calls $48,308.75, and is all in
durrrr shows [6h 8h]
Son-in-Law shows [Th Tc]
Uncalled bet of $9,633 returned to durrrr
*** RIVER *** [Td Ts 7h 5h] [4h]
durrrr shows a straight flush, Eight high
Son-in-Law shows four of a kind, Tens
durrrr wins the pot ($135,217) with a straight flush, Eight high
Son-in-Law is sitting out
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $135,217.50 | Rake $0.50
Board: [Td Ts 7h 5h 4h]
Seat 1: Son-in-Law (big blind) showed [Th Tc] and lost with four of a kind, Tens
Seat 2: durrrr (small blind) showed [6h 8h] and won ($135,217) with a straight flush, Eight high

TTTT could have re-raised the flop

He took on a bit of risk, to make more, and paid the short term price.

Why would he do that? He is 99.8% on the flop. He played it perfectly to get all the other guys chips in as a favourite. He was outdrawn and that is an expense. Reraising the flop there would be awful.

I know, was toungue in cheek. (or attempting to be) :)

Ah ok sorry. Nice piece of angling sir, please throw me back in the pond when you have finished with me :(

very surprised he lead out with a continuation bet on the flop after hitting quads - without knowing how durrr plays more often than not your opponent will have missed that flop as you caught all of it and will pass to any bet.

he got lucky that durrr decides his backdoor straight flush draw was worth a shot at, but then unlucky that he hit!! :D

I would guess that with the small pool of players who would play $200/$400 NL, they probably know eachothers games fairly well and that would be the reason for leading out. He can hardly check raise as his hand might aswell be face up and he is attempting to bloat the pot as you would expect flopping quads is a sure thing to take it down.

That last post was just meant to imply that it is more disguised that way. He is risking losing the oppo totally, but by checking the pot probably stays small regardless and he wants value for it.

leading out is 100% the right play, you have re-raised pre flop there is no hand you should then check, you bet every flop after re-raising pre and then it allows your oppo to make a move on you.

I agree, i check 0% of the time in his position, lead out and give opportunity for a bluff from a good player (which they should be when playing 200/400!)

Nail. Hammer.

 agreed , i was replying to flushy's hint that i was up against a better player.

 

 also agreed , good post

donks=variance=tilt=donks

You go round and round like that, getting louder and louder each time. The eventual result is the super-donk.

Super donk=super suckout=rigged.

In the middle of all this, Tikay is being blinded out

It wasn't a hint its simple fact, the standard you face online is better than you face live.

 i would disagree , how is this a fact ?

 how can you say Joe Bloggs who plays in the the smaller stakes cash games , sit 'n' go's and MTT's i play online is any  better than the players I may play in clubs in Glasgow ( Cincinnatis etc ) or in the local rounders tourneys in Lanarkshire ( most of whom are also online players ) ?

 how is that a simple fact ?