[Global Poker] Unofficial Discussion Thread
Hopped on today and the Global Poker section is not there anymore.
*
Edit/MH: As there are no Sponsored Forums now, their forum has been closed and locked, basically to be fair to the other sites. However, you can still read old posts there, at https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/252/g...
Please use this thread for future discussions.
Thank you.
the 2018-2019 ACR was a bot refund, I received compensation
absolute and ultimate bet were the same network just like bovada/ignition. That was all the same
Honestly no, it was all large field mtts and 8 or 9 handed. The only thing I noticed were a few accounts that were playing at all hours with basically no breaks. They didn't even try to hide it at the time. It didn't matter what time of the day I got on, they were always playing. I believe it was Belarus accounts that my refund came from. ACR even had a website with the bot screen names listed that were banned and the compensation amounts each screen name like myself received which ended up being pennies on the dollar. Think I got like 75 bucks or something close to it
I got a hefty laugh because of the examples you used. Most users aren't solely discussing RNG but cheating issues as well...Here's a short list based on the sites you mentioned. If you straw man their arguments down to RNG alone, it's not being true to complaints - but it is a better argument for yourself, because it's one you can win. Below is just cursory list.
UltimateBet - 2007 scandal with "potripper" superuser account, Russ Hamilton involved, defrauded players of over $20 million
Absolute
I will add something to your list:
- William Hill (iPoker- PLAYTECH) admitted somewhere between 2008 and 2015 that they were using house bots.
- Amya Gaming that runs Pokerstars had a massive criminal court case because of criminal money activities in the market, which doesn't speak for a trustworthy reputation.
- Party Poker secretly divided the player pools between 2008 and 2015 into Fish and Pros. Without telling anyone. It came out when two Regs playing in the same house
noticed that they had different cashgame tables in their lobby. So Party put weak players together and strong players. That was a huge scandal in the forums around that time.
There are way more shady things done but I don't have the time to post everything here.
At a certain point in time it became clear that the sites aimed to balance out the games so that equities ran closer, which means the money in the ecosystem can be raked longer, which equals profit for the owner.
Also using house bots or influencing player pools is an absolute NO GO and can be regarded as 100% scam.
Just because there is no one having evidence that for example GG or Stars use house bots or fix certain outcomes, it doesn't mean it is not happening.
My examples above were also regarded as impossible in the forums by the "culties" as I call the integrity believers back in the days, and yet it was happening.
What I find very irritating is that even after all these shady things came out, people are still super fanatic about the integrity of online poker.
It is as if nothing happened, and everyone questioning it is a conspiracy theorist.
Which leads me to the conclusion that these "culties" are either payed forum troll, or just delusional.
I don't say GG is rigged. But after everything in the past, people are delusional if they don't at least admit, that it is LIKLEY.
Greed my friends has no limits.
And regulations mean nothing. Goverments just secure that they get a piece of the cake. Anyone that thinks goverments "regulate" to make your game save also believes in Santa Claus.
What are you using "equity distribution" to mean? Because in poker, it refers to the distribution of equity among the parts of your range, but you're obviously using it to mean something else and while you say "it's a common complaint in MTTs", you're the first person I've ever seen to use that term in this way, so I'm wondering if you are appropriating it to mean something that isn't clear.
Mid tournament there are indicators that we should be playing looser because the field tightens up. It may also indicate that players are playing premiums more, sticking to a tight UTG range, and so if they bet on board with AQT for instance, we should be inclined to believe them due to the data showing they tighten up, and likely are hitting that range. If board flops 237 though, we should bet large. It also seems to indicate we should be 3 betting more in mid game stages and exploitatively, with hands you shouldn't 3b with, fold to 4b. (This is only a guess based on the data observed)
Most people who are playing attention to how the average Global player plays is being aggressive because they are passive. They are folding when players bet at them on AQT boards because the average Global player isn't bluffing. They are cbetting and 3b more than they "should do" in equilibrium because the average Global player folds more often than they should.
As to sample size; you sit there and record data for a tournament you're not in and then tell me to do that 1,000,000 times...I'm just not going to. It's tedious and boring data collection, and we can likely get the data we need from a smaller sample size. We're not MDAing this, we don't have access to hands which would be more precise. I do agree though, more data would allow more abstractions; I just don't really care. I happened to be bored the other day when i did it, and the results surprised me.
Nobody is going to do that because it's pointless, but the point stands that a sample size of 1 in MTTs is literally nothing.
I still don't understand your hypothesis, though. It seems to be that you think that the site is cheating you by artificially depressing the equities of big stacks when they play hands? That can't be it, right?
I got a hefty laugh because of the examples you used. Most users aren't solely discussing RNG but cheating issues as well...Here's a short list based on the sites you mentioned. If you straw man their arguments down to RNG alone, it's not being true to complaints - but it is a better argument for yourself, because it's one you can win. Below is just cursory list.
UltimateBet - 2007 scandal with "potripper" superuser account, Russ Hamilton involved, defrauded players of over $20 million
Absolute
Ok? Again, this changes nothing. I wasn't talking about players cheating. Hell, I've been refunded at multiple sites for this and I know about most of these scandals. You're just stating the obvious of which nobody denies and it has nothing to do with what I'm talking about
People are specifically blaming the RNG and specifically claiming the site they play on is rigged in that manner. To max out rake and to manipulate hand outcomes to make them lose and whatever other nonsense they try to conjure up
They can scream until they're blue in the face it doesn't change reality. It also doesn't give them the right to flat out lie and be intellectually dishonest
Ok? Again, this changes nothing. I wasn't talking about players cheating. Hell, I've been refunded at multiple sites for this and I know about most of these scandals. You're just stating the obvious of which nobody denies and it has nothing to do with what I'm talking about
People are specifically blaming the RNG and specifically claiming the site they play on is rigged in that manner. To max out rake and to manipulate hand outcomes to make them lose and whatever other nonsense they try to conjur
Again my guy, you're talking out your ass, and changing the argument into something you think you can win. Not all people complaining, are complaining about RNG, but there is a massive thread called something like "Global Poker RNG discussion" where they do have a lengthy discussion on it.
The groups in said thread fall into two major groups. 1.) It's a grey market loophole. 2.) Those who understand the law, and operate on the assumption the sites are following the laws.
If group 1 is correct; it doesn't change the law and the site should be shut down for legal reasons.
If group 2 is correct; the site should remain open because it's following the law.
Alas, this is getting boring, because you could have just read those threads and seen this is the case, and I feel by making me reiterate it for you, you're going to try to pin an opinion on me, but i don't have one.
And these people aren't being dishonest, nor are they lying. It's called 'alternate viewpoints'....
What are you using "equity distribution" to mean? Because in poker, it refers to the distribution of equity among the parts of your range, but you're obviously using it to mean something else and while you say "it's a common complaint in MTTs", you're the first person I've ever seen to use that term in this way, so I'm wondering if you are appropriating it to mean something that isn't clear.
Most people who are playing attention to how the average Global player plays is being aggressive because
That's the impression I got from Grok. ED means artificial suppression. If you look at last section 'why doesn't tight play explain this' is Groks response to why tight play wouldn't be the solution from it's perspective given the data.
doesn't mean it's right, doesn't mean it's wrong.... just means that was it's analysis.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
Again my guy, you're talking out your ass, and changing the argument into something you think you can win. Not all people complaining, are complaining about RNG, but there is a massive thread called something like "Global Poker RNG discussion" where they do have a lengthy discussion on it.
In doing research because I got curious outside of what forums are saying, I found this.
They go through definitions within the link and the RNG thread is operating on faulty assumptions. The link explains why.
I do think this link is kind of the 'end all, be all' of the debate, and if the thread was still active i'd have posted it there. The people claiming to know the law in the thread were misrepresenting the law, and I admit, they pulled wool over my eyes. (Feels foolish to parrot incorrect information, but now I believe this is the correct information - that incorrect information being that sweepstakes can't be skilled games, and therefore they must either be operating in a grey area or abiding by law through manipulation - both sides were wrong. They are not operating in a grey area, nor would they need to manipulate RNG to comply. They are full compliant; no grey area; no need to alter anything. Both sides had compelling evidence, but this article showcases it's just faulty thinking)
If the link turns out to be wrong, I throw my hands in the air and just quit trying to comprehend the topic.
.
There seems to be a bug at the tables today. The cards are not greyed out when you fold like usual. So its hard to judge whether or not you're in a hand.
I've contacted support through email but figured i should post here as well.
There seems to be a bug at the tables today. The cards are not greyed out when you fold like usual. So its hard to judge whether or not you're in a hand.
I've contacted support through email but figured i should post here as well.
they said on discord support is aware and they are working on a fix
Holy ****, he's still going on, this is wild
That's the impression I got from Grok. ED means artificial suppression. If you look at last section 'why doesn't tight play explain this' is Groks response to why tight play wouldn't be the solution from it's perspective given the data.
doesn't mean it's right, doesn't mean it's wrong.... just means that was it's analysis.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
Would you be able to, using clear and precise language, and terms that everyone knows and uses, without using AI summaries or quotes, explain your hypothesis? Clearly you have an idea that you are trying to prove or disprove by railbirding a tourney and writing down random stack sizes at different points. Are you able to effectively communicate what that idea is?
Again my guy, you're talking out your ass, and changing the argument into something you think you can win. Not all people complaining, are complaining about RNG, but there is a massive thread called something like "Global Poker RNG discussion" where they do have a lengthy discussion on it.
I didn't change anything lmao
There's no "argument for me to win" I called someone out on their bullshit and that's that. Between this and the weird bet proposals that don't even make sense, I dunno wtf you're going on about
The groups in said thread fall into two major groups. 1.) It's a grey market loophole. 2.) Those who understand the law, and operate on the assumption the sites are following the laws.
If group 1 is correct; it doesn't change the law and the site should be shut down for legal reasons.
If group 2 is correct; the site should remain open because it's following the law.
Alas, this is getting boring, because you could have just read those threads and seen this is the case, and I feel by making me rei
Alternative viewpoints lmfao
Would you be able to, using clear and precise language, and terms that everyone knows and uses, without using AI summaries or quotes, explain your hypothesis? Clearly you have an idea that you are trying to prove or disprove by railbirding a tourney and writing down random stack sizes at different points. Are you able to effectively communicate what that idea is?
Popcorn.gif
Would you be able to, using clear and precise language, and terms that everyone knows and uses, without using AI summaries or quotes, explain your hypothesis? Clearly you have an idea that you are trying to prove or disprove by railbirding a tourney and writing down random stack sizes at different points. Are you able to effectively communicate what that idea is?
Nothing more than tight play mid tourney is exploitable. That's my take sans Grok input. Grok input is a head scratcher.
I didn't change anything lmao
... the weird bet proposals that don't even make sense...
https://youtu.be/UJnJjnlIp9k?si=lErAvFgq...
The above is my opinion on this stated by Doug Polk. Bet or you're full of ****.
The reason it's an odd bet is because one of the accounts that had their comments deleted wasn't banned, that you had claimed was banned. I was banking on you naming that account, so I could just link their profile and say 'they weren't banned' and take your money while not taking bets on accounts I didn't know about (pretty much every other account that had comments deleted)
By chance, I happened to see them post in a different thread, clicked their profile and saw no ban. It was a lock bet.
https://youtu.be/UJnJjnlIp9k?si=lErAvFgq...
The above is my opinion on this stated by Doug Polk. Bet or you're full of ****.
The reason it's an odd bet is because one of the accounts that had their comments deleted wasn't banned, that you had claimed was banned. I was banking on you naming that account, so I could just link their profile and say 'they weren't banned' and take your money while not taking bets on accounts I didn't know about (pretty much every other account that had co
Dude is incoherent at this point
Any sng players here noticed the new format doesn't let you tile tables anymore?
I played 2 husng tables today and you have to manually click between games. it's extremely annoying and 100% will make 4 tabling impossible. why would they even do this dumb ****?
Take your schizo meds bro
You know the cool part of online forums like these; we can safely assume the most toxic people are toxic due to lack of skill at the game and want to bring others down.
I think the wise people here have caught onto the tactics, and you can revel in your own misery. We're not going to join you.
I've been a ms-hs pro for years, the peak of irony is calling ppl toxic due to skill issue while you're the one writing novels about rigtard suspicions and trying to prop bet people on the legitimacy of the platform. C'mon man.
