i'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything....

[SuM827 0]

It's a serious question - something that unlikely would be a pretty clear demonstration that there's a fatal flaw in the rng. So are you still playing there?Why would I care as long as I flopped as many flushes athe next guy?

It would probably work out quite nicely for someone that pushes AA and KK, limps with all other PP, and suited Aces..... wouldn't you say?

[PA32R 0]

It's a serious question - something that unlikely would be a pretty clear demonstration that there's a fatal flaw in the rng. So are you still playing there?Why would I care as long as I flopped as many flushes athe next guy?

It would probably work out quite nicely for someone that pushes AA and KK, limps with all other PP, and suited Aces..... wouldn't you say?

I'm guessing Smash isn't playing a lot of nl.But sure, it would be reasonably easy to devise an optimal strategy as long as you know that the ONLY flaw in the rng is radically excessive suited flops. I don't see how that would be true, and how you would know if it were or it weren't without a whole lot of analysis.

[Dixie Wrecked 0]

I have been playing on Pokerroom skins for about 5 months and everytime I have a suited pair I have never hit anything on the flop. Or if I am lucky one card will come a very rare occurance.Often times I will hold a A 10 and the opposite will fall something like 9 10 Q:diamond: .Since reading this post I discussed this with two of my co workers who both play on Pokerroom and they have experinced the same.By the way I have played at least 100k in hands.

Yeah, whenever I get suited pairs, I become suspicious.edit: (sw)

Yeah, I believe it was in the 04 or 05 WSOP ME on the first hand that there were two K on the table at the same time. If one guy had both as his hole cards then that would've been a suited pair and very suspicious.

[dunkirk 0]

Smash,Are you standing by the 28% figure? Did you really look at the hand history? Did you look at even 100 of those hands like I suggested? Did you see about 28 1 suited flops per 100 hands?Are you still convinced that you played 4000 hands and saw 28% 1 suited flops?If you believe that there is a 5% probability of an event occuring and after a significant trial (4000 hands is significant) it is running at 28% something is very wrong. I am completely serious, if you send me that hand history and it is legitimate then this is the story of a lifetime for you - you will have proven beyond a doubt a massive flaw in the hand generater for this site. I would be happy to analyze the hand history for you if you can provide it to me.

[PoppinFresh 0]

dunkirk, I wouldn't take smash too seriously on this. Feel free to run some numbers on this topic of his too: http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...3976&highlight= :wink:

[dunkirk 0]

I just checked out your link. I think Smash is having some fun at my expense. Either that or he is just not quite getting these stats extracted correctly from PokerTracker.Incidentally I did another little spreadsheet project to try to explain the unlikelyhood of a 70 sigma event. Unfortunately with excels floating point limitations anything beyond about 7 sigma is not calculable. However, I decided to take a look at the probablity of having 4000 hands with no suited flops. This is about a 207/11 or about an 18 sigma event, it is actually more likely than having 1128 suited flops out of 4000 which is about a 70 sigma event.Anyway, the no suited flops is .95^4000. which is a very small number 7.8*10^-90. This implies that Smash would have to play 1.27*10^89 trials of 4000 hands before we might expect this to happen 1 time. To put this is perspective if every person in the world were 1000 tabling and playing a 1000 hands a second it would take 6*10^65 years for this to occur by chance. Realize this is the 18 sigma event not the 70 sigma event. This is never, ever going to happen (unless the hand generator is screwed up or Smash is fooling around).

[Wingmaster05 0]

this is why i only play suited cards, all pairs suck.