I Can't Win On Pokerstars

[shrimp4789 0]

not sure how long you've been playing NL, and Im sure you know this....but theres such a vast different between NL and Limit, its not funny. maybe your using your limit tendancies at your nl tournaments? using similar strategies?maybe try looking at it from a completely different angle?again im sure you've done this, just throwing out suggestions incase you havnt

[Actuary 3]

not sure how long you've been playing NL, and Im sure you know this....but theres such a vast different between NL and

yes, tourneys have a ton of variance.And, I'm not aggressive enough to go deep in MTT'sAnd I can't fade 3 outters w/o bigger stacks

[mrdannyg 274]

I haven't read the whole thread so i am not really sure if this is a serious thread but i deposited 3000 on stars 1 week or so ago and i just couldn't beat it although I am(was) a winner omaha player 2.5 months while i was at Crypto.(I became Gold Star in a week.)I am not saying its rigged or something.I just couldn't make any money on Stars.So two days ago i just withdraw half of my bankroll and deposited back on Crypto.Now i am playing on stars only when there aren't any games running on Crypto.And i am happy.

i'm serious dude - only 1-3 tables going at a time, but Pokerroom (or FCP) has probably the worst PLO/PLO8 play i've ever seen. check it out.

[shamhawks 0]

bad beat forum is down the streetthis thread is dumbif you think stars is rigged then stop playing there, anyone that plays on a site they truly believe is rigged is a moron.

I posted a thread in another forum similar to OP, and while 90% of the responces were in agreement that the randomness of pokerstars is way off and really think they need to tweak the RNG, you always get a poster like you that calls people morons for speaking their opinion, although i never seen once the OP say the word "rigged"It's only rigged if you think certain player's are getting special treatment, but the bad RNG has no preference, so everyone is getting them.I would love a math guy to analyze PS compared to other sites for the %of turns/rivers sucking out and just the shear number of action hands on that site. I have played online for the past 6 years and was pretty loyal to party and probably only played about 10% of my playing time at pokerstars (have played every major site though) but the it is 10x worse than every site i have played, not just cuz of the Bad beats, but by the number of them and i'm not just talking about me, i'm talking about just seeing so many for everyone.So call me a moron, but i have reduced my time playing at Stars, not cuz I think it's rigged, but I do think it's flawed....Take those blinders off and see the world.

[poguemahone68 0]

I absolutely love/hate starsI played on Party long before stars and then made my first deposit on stars after joining this site to play the neg-os. I've played a minimum of a year on several of the other major sites, including full tilt. The volume of bad beats, runner runner beats and 2,3,4 outers on the river at stars that I've witnessed is so large that it's remarkable.I haven't played many cash games on stars, mostly MTTs of all varieties and buy-ins. One of the biggest things that has bothered me has been when and how these beats take place. Tons of chips late in a tourney and lose it all to a 2 outer, **** like that.I have never thought that stars was rigged and still don't.I do think something is not quite right with the stars RNG, but unitl the other sites offer the sheer volume of tournies of all types and buy-ins, I'll continue to get punished on stars.

[timwakefield 68]

You guys do realize how stupid you sound, right? There's something wrong with the RNG because sometimes people hit 2 outers???? And not only is there something wrong with the RNG, but it's always you who loses to the bad beat, right? Come on, you guys can't be serious.

[nutzbuster 7]

I left Stars too, but I S A P. Not sure what to say, but too got crushed there in the cash games...(but then I cashed in the WCOOP !). Go figure.

[shamhawks 0]

You guys do realize how stupid you sound, right? There's something wrong with the RNG because sometimes people hit 2 outers???? And not only is there something wrong with the RNG, but it's always you who loses to the bad beat, right? Come on, you guys can't be serious.

you know how stupid you sound by not reading posts. don't see anyone saying they are the only one get bad beats, just alot of people who see way too many beats period on that site.I go away from this site for a few months, but it's the same person who responds right away after a post of mine calling people stupid...some things never change

[FourFlusher 0]

Is it possible that you are either just not remembering the good times, or, the other players folded prior to showdown needing runner-runner like they should have?I don't know if I can explain this, but, I'll try.The first part is easy...we remember the beats, they stand out. When we have our hands hold up, we just move on, they aren't as memorable. During the course of a MTT our hands probably hold up many times, then you take a beat and start screaming. That's the one you remember.We never even know about the times the villians fold and don't even try for runner-runner. That denies us the chance to see if the long term odds for/against are truly being represented. All we see are the beats, and it seems like it's a very high percentage of the time, because we don't see the others. The times when the villians would have missed aren't being revealed. Often times we don't even see when they went past the flop and missed, because we don't know what they were drawing to.

[wrto4556 0]

I talked to lee jones last night playing 2-7 actuary. He apologized and said everything is going to be better. oh ****, i forgot to find out when...oh well.btw, teddy. FCP doesnt hold a flame to crack.

[timwakefield 68]

you know how stupid you sound by not reading posts. don't see anyone saying they are the only one get bad beats, just alot of people who see way too many beats period on that site.

Suggesting that the RNG is somehow fixed (or broken) so that it will dole out lots of extra bad beats is ridiculous. And no, I don't see anybody complaining that they always hit their 2-outers.

I go away from this site for a few months, but it's the same person who responds right away after a post of mine calling people stupid...some things never change

I have no idea what you're talking about. The same person? Who, me? When did I do that before. Listen, suggesting that Stars' RNG is not accurate is idiotic. Sorry if you thought I was singling you out, but I was talking to the dozen other people who said it too.

[shamhawks 0]

Suggesting that the RNG is somehow fixed (or broken) so that it will dole out lots of extra bad beats is ridiculous. And no, I don't see anybody complaining that they always hit their 2-outers. I have no idea what you're talking about. The same person? Who, me? When did I do that before. Listen, suggesting that Stars' RNG is not accurate is idiotic. Sorry if you thought I was singling you out, but I was talking to the dozen other people who said it too.

suggesting that it is not possible for the RNG to be as random as it could be is kinda of sad as well .never said ps is trying, but i really do believe in what i say about it not being that random. I have to go to work now but will continue when i get off.

[poguemahone68 0]

You guys do realize how stupid you sound, right? There's something wrong with the RNG because sometimes people hit 2 outers???? And not only is there something wrong with the RNG, but it's always you who loses to the bad beat, right? Come on, you guys can't be serious.

You should read the posts before making dumbass blanket statements. No one here thinks it just happens to them or most don't believe that.I'm dead serious with my post. I've spent so much time playing online poker over the last 4 years, that I do take it seriously.This is probably just a way for Actuary to add more "idiots" to his list, but I'm already on that list so fuck it.

[timwakefield 68]

You should read the posts before making dumbass blanket statements. No one here thinks it just happens to them or most don't believe that.

Ok, but if the RNG is not really random, you're suggesting that it gives out more "bad beats" than it should. Why is that the case? Why not less? Or, let's see some evidence. Show me a rundown of 50,000 hands, and that the percentages are noticably different than what they should be. Obviously nobody is going to do that because you really do know that it would be an exercise in futility.

[Mercury69 3]

You guys do realize how stupid you sound, right? There's something wrong with the RNG because sometimes people hit 2 outers???? And not only is there something wrong with the RNG, but it's always you who loses to the bad beat, right? Come on, you guys can't be serious.

I know how stupid it sounds, but it's a way to vent. Besides, I'm not going to stop playing on Stars just because donkeys hit their two outers on me. Statistics say that I'll have my run and maybe just maybe, it'll be during a big money tourney, then I can afford to play the $55 rebuy. There are no donks at that level, right? Right...?

[poguemahone68 0]

Ok, but if the RNG is not really random, you're suggesting that it gives out more "bad beats" than it should. Why is that the case? Why not less? Or, let's see some evidence. Show me a rundown of 50,000 hands, and that the percentages are noticably different than what they should be. Obviously nobody is going to do that because you really do know that it would be an exercise in futility.

I totally agree with you here. I've thought about how to quantify what I've seen as odd and am not sure how to go about it.The thing I've noticed after nearly 2 years playing on stars is that the beats seem to be more prevelant and more brutal than any other site I've played at. Both are hard to quantify.I can get every single hand history from stars. Then what do I do with them? Is there software out there that can show how many tournament chips I've lost vs won when all the money went in as an 80% favorite?It's the brutality of the beats that occur over and over that gets noticed. I take beats on every site, just not nearly as much or as brutal as I do on stars.I can't believe I'm even posting this, I'm sure I sound like a complete idiot.

[Royal_Tour 0]

I hate to say this but i find Full Tilt sucks, I posted a few hands in the BBF. I noticed in my times spent that all my dominating hands Like Ak, vs A,x etc.. have lost a lot. I mean like 70% of the time, my 70% fav to win hand will lose.which makes it like, umm. i dunno 140% of ZOMGBBQ!!!11!!and during this time spent there, I also played at a B&M where i have been dominating, and not just cuz I pwn all the players, but because my hands held.

[Royal_Tour 0]

I'm starting my own scientology of online poker.here it is...online gambling came out in the earlier days of the internet. Planet Poker made its debut, and set up a crappy RNG based with time, it had bugs and the bugs were found.eventually the idea of online gambling caught on. Porn site CEO/lawyer Ruth Parasol figured she could make a killing at what would probably be a illegal site, but with her knowledge and background would be able to make it work. She teams up with Anurag and they go over the idea of the online gaming, Not really caring too much about the fairness of the games, they create a RNG that doesnt work like a random seed shuffle, but instead it randomly selects winning hands in relation to winning flops. Its just up to the player to play them.Now, hands arent delt out as card per card, but rather as a 2 card deal to each player.These 2 cards reflect the board directly in relation to the seat. They even go a bit further into this as they start to make money with new sign ons, and Ruth figures once they get new sign ons, whats better than new sign ons? Hooking the existing ones also.So now they have a setup at everyplayers registration where new players will get good runs of cards for XXX amount of hands, then will hit a bad run, hopng the player will re-deposit.Anurag didnt agree with this, but Ruth paid him off with Hookers. Then, others started to get into this fad but Ruth had claims and patents on the idea and software, but she figured she could make money selling to other companies also.Putting a price too high on the software/ rights, other people went to other countries to license a version of onlinepoker. Not caring much about their legal issues since Ruth blanketed the entire industry anyways, new sites went to cheap version of cheap software not caring if hands were trully random or not.L. Ron Hubbard

[nutzbuster 7]

I'm starting my own scientology of online poker.here it is...online gambling came out in the earlier days of the internet. Planet Poker made its debut, and set up a crappy RNG based with time, it had bugs and the bugs were found.eventually the idea of online gambling caught on. Porn site CEO/lawyer Ruth Parasol figured she could make a killing at what would probably be a illegal site, but with her knowledge and background would be able to make it work. She teams up with Anurag and they go over the idea of the online gaming, Not really caring too much about the fairness of the games, they create a RNG that doesnt work like a random seed shuffle, but instead it randomly selects winning hands in relation to winning flops. Its just up to the player to play them.Now, hands arent delt out as card per card, but rather as a 2 card deal to each player.These 2 cards reflect the board directly in relation to the seat. They even go a bit further into this as they start to make money with new sign ons, and Ruth figures once they get new sign ons, whats better than new sign ons? Hooking the existing ones also.So now they have a setup at everyplayers registration where new players will get good runs of cards for XXX amount of hands, then will hit a bad run, hopng the player will re-deposit.Anurag didnt agree with this, but Ruth paid him off with Hookers. Then, others started to get into this fad but Ruth had claims and patents on the idea and software, but she figured she could make money selling to other companies also.Putting a price too high on the software/ rights, other people went to other countries to license a version of onlinepoker. Not caring much about their legal issues since Ruth blanketed the entire industry anyways, new sites went to cheap version of cheap software not caring if hands were trully random or not.L. Ron Hubbard

pure genius ....

[NaugaHyde 0]

You should read the posts before making dumbass blanket statements. No one here thinks it just happens to them or most don't believe that.I'm dead serious with my post. I've spent so much time playing online poker over the last 4 years, that I do take it seriously.This is probably just a way for Actuary to add more "idiots" to his list, but I'm already on that list so fuck it.

If you really think this way post some PT stats to back it up.Stars is rigged, well then Lee must just love my ***.

[Actuary 3]

while I can imagine how an RNG could be designed to give more bad beats and more action flops; it's crazy to think they are doing it. In particular, the bad beats rely on another player making a crazy call often times.It would be very tough to prove. I don't think it's rigged or flawed without strong evidence and motive.I know I see so many more hands online than in home tournies.But take this actually quite common occurence.You get AT-AK. I hit TP online a huge percentage of times compared to how seemingly little I hit at home.Ok. now I know that I just made a silly statement. And 99.99654% chance that it just feels that way. But, I cant; believe how I never hit TP at home relatively speaking.And pogue, I'm not collecting names, I"m at the top of the list!*********8

[pokerplayer24 0]

+16k last 5 days, def rigged.I PS

[Royal_Tour 0]

while I can imagine how an RNG could be designed to give more bad beats and more action flops; it's crazy to think they are doing it. In particular, the bad beats rely on another player making a crazy call often times.It would be very tough to prove. I don't think it's rigged or flawed without strong evidence and motive.I know I see so many more hands online than in home tournies.But take this actually quite common occurence.You get AT-AK. I hit TP online a huge percentage of times compared to how seemingly little I hit at home.Ok. now I know that I just made a silly statement. And 99.99654% chance that it just feels that way. But, I cant; believe how I never hit TP at home relatively speaking.And pogue, I'm not collecting names, I"m at the top of the list!*********8

better yet, My theory.also note my theory explains why when you multi table, Your hole cards will act in relation to the flop on another table open.Thats what site operators call the Ruthless Bug, Its a pure slap in the face to everyone who plays, and Ruth did this as a joke to stir the pot

+16k last 5 days, def rigged.I PS

Note, my theory can also explain this.Some players are better than other, its simple. however when players start getting to higher stakes, you start to see 2 things happen.A - players who make itB - players who go broke. The players who make it, ar ethe ones who made a big gamble but were lucky, they were siting in better seats more often than other players and were able to have their hole cards directly relate to their flops a greater percent of the time.It still takes skill to play well, but at a level of play that gives little error, the Ruthless Bug takes over

[Actuary 3]

how did this get to 5 pages!

that's what I"m wondering.

[Royal_Tour 0]

that's what I"m wondering.

everyone loves a good ghost story