[Global Poker] Unofficial Discussion Thread

A user posted their experience, got trolled and I can understand removing the trolling, but the user experience being banned is odd decision by mods unless they believed he would continue to get harassed.

I've read on reddit one user suspected these were cheaters trying to belittle any criticism so others would deposit on the site and be cheated out of their money. I don't know, but...I will say, the user wasn't wrong about how odd the belittling was.

I mean, have you ever had someone make a complaint about anything and felt the need to 'correct them' with harassment? I can understand disagreeing, but belittling the person your disagreeing with is odd.

Update: Still no ID/address verification a month in. Last thing they told me was that my case was being handled and that they'd get back to me whenever possible.

Still have no idea what the issue can be at this point. I wish they'd just let me try to re-submit my stuff instead of them basically holding my funds hostage. Every time I emailed them they've just told me the same thing over and over again.

I read here that a few people also said it took them forever to get their stuff verified. Not sure why their processes are so slow though.

The "user" (more likely a fake account made by someone who already posts here and is just bitter and desperate for attention) made a fake account and made a bunch of **** up and then got banned

It was the same thing with Lucy's Fur

So I actually decided to prove equity distribution isn't in effect, since it's a common complaint in MTTs.

I figured it would be easy to prove incorrect. The method I chose to do this was to monitor the top 10 players over the course of a tournament, as well as the chip lead to average stack.

I am about to provide some data, and I'd like someone with data analysis background to find out what I did wrong, because right now it's indicating an anomaly, which defies my expectations of what I should have observed. I must have f----ed something up. (I know I'm the first person to believe someone making a complaint, but I didn't expect this result)

I recorded the top 10 chip stacks at 17 points in a 105-player tournament (10K starting stacks, 10-minute blind levels), from 24 minutes (100+ players) to 3 hours 15 minutes (8 players left). I calculated two things: the “spread” (top stack divided by 10th stack, like 20,848 / 11,406 = 1.8x) and how much the top stack beats the average (total chips 1,050,000 divided by players left, e.g., 20,848 / 10,500 = 2x at 24m).

ELI5: I wrote down the 10 biggest piles of chips every few minutes in a poker game with 105 people starting with 10,000 chips each. I checked how much bigger the #1 pile was compared to the #10 pile, and how much the #1 pile beat the average pile everyone would have if chips were split evenly.

The Anomaly: The spreads are too tight. Early on (24m–1h), it’s 1.5x–1.9x (e.g., 36K vs. 19K at 55m, 85 players). Mid-game (1h–2h), it peaks at 2.5x (79K vs. 31K at 1h 55m, 41 players, 64 eliminations). Late-game (2h–3h 15m), it hits 5.0x (250K vs. 57K at 8 players). Normal tournaments show 5x–10x mid-game and 10x+ late. Top-to-average is also low: 2x–2.9x early, 3.1x–4.3x mid, 1.9x–3.2x late, versus 4x–7x mid and 5x–15x late expected online.

ELI5: The biggest pile isn’t much bigger than the 10th pile—like only 2 or 3 times bigger when half the players are out, instead of 5 or 10 times bigger like in most games. Even late, it’s only 5 times bigger, not 10 or more. The #1 pile should also be way ahead of the average pile—like 5 to 15 times—but it’s only 2 to 4 times, which is too close.

Why Tight Players Don’t Explain It: Tight players (who play safe, avoid big risks) could keep stacks close early—1.5x–1.9x fits with small bets and few all-ins at 167 big blinds start. But by mid-game (1h 55m, blinds 1K/2K, 10 big blinds for short stacks), 64 players are out—tight play can’t stop all-ins then. Spreads should hit 5x–10x from knockouts, not 2.5x. Late (8 players, 2,500/5,000 blinds), tight play collapses—short stacks must shove, yet 5.0x is below the 10x+ norm. The tightness holds too long and too strong.

ELI5: Imagine everyone’s super careful, only betting a little at first—that keeps piles close early, like we see. But later, when half the kids are out and the bets get big, some should grab huge piles by winning fights. Here, even with tons gone, the piles stay pretty even—way too even for a wild game like poker. Careful kids can’t keep it this close that long.

(Tight players was my intitial assumption, I believe I might be underestimating the impact of extremely tight players and maybe instead of an anomaly I found a player population exploit? Exploit being that the data indicates extremely tight play maybe...)

If some unfortunate soul understands what I've written, please inform me what I did wrong.

They need to fix this, as this takes priority IMO.

Respectfully, you're way off base.

Sheep could provide you more insight, but I won't. You're way off base.

Can we bet on it though? I'll cover you 10:1. Meaning for every dollar you bet, I'll cover it with $10. If you're right you get 10x whatever you put in the bet. If I win, I get 1/10th of what I'm risking. I get to decide which bets for which bans I'll take, since I'm in a losing proposition.

Bro wtf are you even talking about? There is nothing to bet on. Lucy's Fur was just some idiot who is still probably on here making fake accounts or lurking like a delusional clown who can't just take the L and move on

All these other accounts with recent join dates, vast majority of them are very clearly fake. If you can't see that then lol @ u

One of the users you claimed was banned wasn't. His comment was just deleted, that's it.

Do you want to bet or not, because if you really believe the BS you're spouting, I'd love to bet on it. I'm willing to put any amount up to $1,000,000 covering you at 10:1. If you want to bet, we can find someone to arbitrate. I get to pick which bans I accept the bet on because I'm in a losing proposition

You are using data from one tournament to broader proclaim anomalies in MTT chip distribution. This is obviously far too small a sample size, in any given tournament it should be obvious these numbers will be extremely volatile and insufficienct for drawing any statistical conclusions.

There is also no evidence provided towards what a "normal" distribution might look like other than numbers you seem to have made up. You also haven't addressed the idea of how field size and structure will affect these numbers.

Hope this helps.

I think this data can be extrapolated to showcase we as players should be looser mid tourney, or ED. If I was playing at those stakes, the adjustments I would make would be playing much looser mid game, between the 1 and 2 hour mark. That seems the tightest, but these numbers aren't made up I told you where I got them. It may seem like I made them up, but that's because I'm not dropping raw data here....as it would be spam like. Edit: Oh, you meant the numbers for 'normal' and I got those from Grok. (So take with heavy grain of salt as far as 'normal' - in fact most of the reply i just had Grok write up (the reply your responded to) based on Groks opinion.)

This seems to showcase such extremely tight play, that LAG should take prio over TAG or OMC type play in these tourneys. With emphasis on mid tourney. You are right though, we'd need more data from those stakes before making a change in play style, probably.

The section where you see 'why tight play doesn't explain it' is because I asked grok 'wouldn't tight play explain this' and it doesn't think so, but I think it may. It put odds at 60% ED 40% tight/natural

This seems like a colossal waste of time.

The structures are all turbo, and the players are all too tight/passive. That should probably explain whatever stack issues you think you're seeing. Also, one tourney is a nothing sample size. What's your overall hypothesis again?

Grok thinks it's ED, I think it's tight players, like very tight.

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)

I haven't written Grok off yet because AI is better at analyzing data than I will ever be, and Grok is saying 60% ED 40% natural variance when I asked it to approximate %'s likelihood. When I asked it to give a definitive answer is said 'Yes, ED is likely in effect'. When I then hit 'think' so i could read it's thought process, it's basing it off the abnormally tight chip stacks. It expects larger disparities at varying times.

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.

If you spent the time that you spend rambling like a schizo rigtard actually studying and improving in an impactful way, maybe you'd be good instead of writing novels as a forum yapper.

Projection is a bitch.

All you seem to do in this forum is insulting people, and especially people that are skeptical of certain poker sites being legit. Why don't you just delete your account here? No one needs a toxic human with a desinformation agenda like you.

I agree with you and wanted to verbally showcase support for standing up to a bully. Discussions can be had without insults.

It takes courage to speak up like that.

"It takes courage to delusionally complain about online poker rng on a forum and tell someone they're projecting when they say to work hard and get good, I don't like the idea of having to put in effort I want to desperately find an excuse."

Jesus

This ends my participation in 2+2. It is of no value anymore. For Global, go to their Discord channel. There's nothing for you here.

You baited me into the most basic of defenses against my own play. You want me to study, but you have no f---ing baseline buddy. Just stop the toxic. I'm fairly certain we're all reading books, studying gtowiz, and more...but you skip all that and make assumptions, which is just highlighting your lack of character.

Dude this is a poker community, not a school yard. Community means people look into the same direction and support each other, no matter if
people have different opinions about certain subjects.
Especially with this subject (rigged/not rigged) your position to be arrogant and insulting is ridiculous.
No one can for sure say if the online poker providers fix their games or not.
It all comes down to trust or no trust. Period.

You don't program these softwares, so you know nothing, and base insults on that. Seriously, are you out of your mind?

There are way more reasons for fixed games, and also numerous cases of ****ery and scamery over the years, that you really should change your direction, when it comes to this topic, and stop discrediting people, just because they speak up. Let them speak, and stay critical instead of being fanatic.

Ok? Who cares? That doesn't change anything lol

I was just on PokerStars and there was a table literally all fish. They started having a conversation saying literally all the same things that are said in here and on the rigged thread

I played on PartyPoker it was the same thing. Full Tilt it was the same thing. I played on multiple skins of Merge it was the same thing. Paradise Poker same thing. WSEX same thing. UltimateBet same thing. Absolute Poker same thing. Hollywood, Pokerroom, Bodog, Bovada, Ignition same thing. ACR, Global, they're all the same. There is nothing magical about a RNG lmfao. Players have a fold button and have the power to make decisions no matter what cards come down

The fact that this is still even a debate blows my mind because it's the same nonsense from day 1. I started playing poker online in 2002 and literally nothing has changed

Prior to Black Friday, people would say they couldn't wait for the US to legalize online poker and we've had that now for like a decade. Someone today literally said they don't believe the audits for PokerStars PA. Pure delusion

If you want to believe otherwise, then that's fine you have fun with that. However, if someone comes on here and openly states without equivocation a site is doing something nefarious and with zero evidence other than a bad mood and frustration because they just got their ass handed to them in a whirlwind of variance or by superior players, I've got news for you. They're gonna get mocked. And they def should be called out because they're lying. I'm not saying that because I disagree. I'm saying that because after decades of experience and hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit, I know they're wrong and/or misinformed.

It would be nice if ppl had a vested interest in intellectual honesty, but that does not exist in this thread. A litany of fake accounts regurgitating sets of words I've heard a million times before and weird ppl like you white knighting a random and obv fake account who was obv making **** up...If I didn't know any better I'd think you made that account. Or Lucy's Fur. Not that I care, there is nothing to do here but break up the time and laugh at the comedy

There's no shot you posted a 1500 hand sample. I'll let you guys write novels on why you're beating cheated in peace.

I agree, every poker site known to man has someone crying about the RNG and not a single piece of evidence to prove it.....(ever.) I just had this discussion on discord yesterday. People use huds on some of these sites and have millions upon millions of hands and still can't prove it

1500.