SNE launches a petition against Spin & Go format - Page 2

--- Nuked ---

--- Nuked ---

On October 11 2014 21:28 Rapoza wrote: I believe "Spin&Go" target are players who make small deposits($10~$50) and wants a lucky shot to get huge ROI over minimum time. Since $2 prize pool will happen over and over again... even recreative players over time should "feel" like the spin is rigged.

thats actually nice :D

On October 11 2014 14:16 Romm3l wrote: Show nested quote + On October 11 2014 13:37 Floofy wrote: I don't think its good for stars to stop regs from making money. if nobody makes money from poker anymore, people who play it hoping to make money from it will stop. I think the majority of people playing it thinks they can be good enough to make money from it (eventually?), even the fishes. People making millions on stars is pretty good for the site imo, it keeps people's hopes up. thanks for sharing your view, it was interesting but i actually think the opposite. I think fish keep playing when they get the great feeling of winning from time to time, it's what keeps them coming back. if they're playing a game closer to pure gambling with the same illusion of control through making decisions and pressing buttons, they get to have the winning feeling at a decent frequency. If a fish sits in something like hsnl cash in 2014 they'll get their eyes ripped out instantly and have no chance at all. there's a limit to how often a fish will keep coming back into a game in which they _NEVER_ win. lastly you're not going to see a situation where you never hear about anyone win, no matter how tough things get for regs. there will always be big winners visible no matter what. in statistical terms the right tail of the distribution will always extend into big winner territory and this is what's visible to fish, not the location of the mean (e.g. start with 10,000 coin flippers, move the 5000 winners of the flips to round 2, 2500 winners round 3, etc, until you find the best coinflippers on earth)

Sounds like you sir have no idea what variance is.
There ya go: http://pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/ or just flip a coin 20 times, tell us how it went.
You can see the "VISIBILITY" of winrate as high as 4bb/100 ( quite high for 6max higher stakes, or any stakes for that matter ) for lets say 20k hands - and how much fish sit for one session?

This is my favourite part:

there's a limit to how often a fish will keep coming back into a game in which they _NEVER_ win.

It's like you never played this game or hasn't seen how many bad beats can occur in one session.

Spin and Go is fun. It made me deposit and burn 200usd in two days. Sng guys are getting fucked though but you have to take the good with the bad

I thought normal SnG's were completly dead anyway

On October 11 2014 13:37 Floofy wrote: I don't think its good for stars to stop regs from making money. if nobody makes money from poker anymore, people who play it hoping to make money from it will stop. I think the majority of people playing it thinks they can be good enough to make money from it (eventually?), even the fishes. People making millions on stars is pretty good for the site imo, it keeps people's hopes up.

explain vegas casinos please

On October 12 2014 01:54 MadeInPolanD wrote: Show nested quote + On October 11 2014 21:28 Rapoza wrote: I believe "Spin&Go" target are players who make small deposits($10~$50) and wants a lucky shot to get huge ROI over minimum time. Since $2 prize pool will happen over and over again... even recreative players over time should "feel" like the spin is rigged. thats actually nice :D   On October 11 2014 14:16 Romm3l wrote:   On October 11 2014 13:37 Floofy wrote: I don't think its good for stars to stop regs from making money. if nobody makes money from poker anymore, people who play it hoping to make money from it will stop. I think the majority of people playing it thinks they can be good enough to make money from it (eventually?), even the fishes. People making millions on stars is pretty good for the site imo, it keeps people's hopes up. thanks for sharing your view, it was interesting but i actually think the opposite. I think fish keep playing when they get the great feeling of winning from time to time, it's what keeps them coming back. if they're playing a game closer to pure gambling with the same illusion of control through making decisions and pressing buttons, they get to have the winning feeling at a decent frequency. If a fish sits in something like hsnl cash in 2014 they'll get their eyes ripped out instantly and have no chance at all. there's a limit to how often a fish will keep coming back into a game in which they _NEVER_ win. lastly you're not going to see a situation where you never hear about anyone win, no matter how tough things get for regs. there will always be big winners visible no matter what. in statistical terms the right tail of the distribution will always extend into big winner territory and this is what's visible to fish, not the location of the mean (e.g. start with 10,000 coin flippers, move the 5000 winners of the flips to round 2, 2500 winners round 3, etc, until you find the best coinflippers on earth) Sounds like you sir have no idea what variance is. There ya go: http://pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/ or just flip a coin 20 times, tell us how it went. You can see the "VISIBILITY" of winrate as high as 4bb/100 ( quite high for 6max higher stakes, or any stakes for that matter ) for lets say 20k hands - and how much fish sit for one session? This is my favourite part:   there's a limit to how often a fish will keep coming back into a game in which they _NEVER_ win. It's like you never played this game or hasn't seen how many bad beats can occur in one session.

the bad beats and low winrate visibility occur to you with your 4bb/100.

what you forget is you and four other regs are each making 4bb/100++ all from the same fish, whos negative winrate becomes pretty extreme and the fact (s)he is losing badly becomes pretty visible pretty fast.

another thing you don't consider is that while you might guess a fish lossrate and stdev, it probably is incorrect to assume their results follow a gaussian distribution (a central assumption in that basic simulator). You can use central limit theorem to say their observed result after a huge sample of 100 hand blocks will be normally distributed around the true expectation, but that doesn't tell you anything about the fish's actual experience in any given session. fish get a lot of money in in situations where they're drawing stone dead multiway, consistently lose small amounts of money on early streets in ways that pose no risk to the person exploiting them, and a bunch of other possibilities that all lead to a skewed results distribution with a fat left tail and thin right one.

scout326 is a good experimental example of a fish at hsnl ring since he has a big sample size. he made something like -60bb/100, his graph looked like y=-ax and he hardly ever came out of a session in the green.

On October 12 2014 08:48 Skoal wrote: Show nested quote + On October 11 2014 13:37 Floofy wrote: I don't think its good for stars to stop regs from making money. if nobody makes money from poker anymore, people who play it hoping to make money from it will stop. I think the majority of people playing it thinks they can be good enough to make money from it (eventually?), even the fishes. People making millions on stars is pretty good for the site imo, it keeps people's hopes up. explain vegas casinos please

pokerstars doesn't send prostitutes to your hotel

On October 12 2014 09:08 Santafairy wrote: Show nested quote + On October 12 2014 08:48 Skoal wrote:   On October 11 2014 13:37 Floofy wrote: I don't think its good for stars to stop regs from making money. if nobody makes money from poker anymore, people who play it hoping to make money from it will stop. I think the majority of people playing it thinks they can be good enough to make money from it (eventually?), even the fishes. People making millions on stars is pretty good for the site imo, it keeps people's hopes up. explain vegas casinos please pokerstars doesn't send prostitutes to your hotel

apparently you havent received live trny ticket -_-

I suppose they can spread whatever game they like it does suck that the fish always tend to flock to the shittier games whether that be cap tables or now these spin n gos.

What is extremely shady of them is to rake them twice. They rake the buyins and then they also rake 7% out of the top 3 prize pools...

Pokerstars have the complete monopoly over the market and they can do whatever the fuck they want to do, thats the problem, microgaming, ipoker,ongame and enet are the only other networks left im if accurate, and I doubt they got more than 10% of the market combined together

They re pretty aware of all their doings -> double rake here, the temporary 235 FPP tournament problems. They ll just try a bunch of mega user unfriendly stuff, if many people complain about it they ll just w a comment like "whoops we didn't mean that " all will be forgiven & repeat.

I see games raked once and if I counted right rake is for the $1 spinngo is 7.56% (based on prize pool distributed)

zoom and spin and go is all the fishes need when playing poker online. add casino games and sporting bets and you will have a very profitable site. they honestly dont need regs at all now, they've already built a world reknown brand name and created a gigantic user base (built by regs from the ground up) to work with

On October 12 2014 01:54 MadeInPolanD wrote: Show nested quote + On October 11 2014 21:28 Rapoza wrote: I believe "Spin&Go" target are players who make small deposits($10~$50) and wants a lucky shot to get huge ROI over minimum time. Since $2 prize pool will happen over and over again... even recreative players over time should "feel" like the spin is rigged. thats actually nice :D   On October 11 2014 14:16 Romm3l wrote:   On October 11 2014 13:37 Floofy wrote: I don't think its good for stars to stop regs from making money. if nobody makes money from poker anymore, people who play it hoping to make money from it will stop. I think the majority of people playing it thinks they can be good enough to make money from it (eventually?), even the fishes. People making millions on stars is pretty good for the site imo, it keeps people's hopes up. thanks for sharing your view, it was interesting but i actually think the opposite. I think fish keep playing when they get the great feeling of winning from time to time, it's what keeps them coming back. if they're playing a game closer to pure gambling with the same illusion of control through making decisions and pressing buttons, they get to have the winning feeling at a decent frequency. If a fish sits in something like hsnl cash in 2014 they'll get their eyes ripped out instantly and have no chance at all. there's a limit to how often a fish will keep coming back into a game in which they _NEVER_ win. lastly you're not going to see a situation where you never hear about anyone win, no matter how tough things get for regs. there will always be big winners visible no matter what. in statistical terms the right tail of the distribution will always extend into big winner territory and this is what's visible to fish, not the location of the mean (e.g. start with 10,000 coin flippers, move the 5000 winners of the flips to round 2, 2500 winners round 3, etc, until you find the best coinflippers on earth) Sounds like you sir have no idea what variance is. There ya go: http://pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/ or just flip a coin 20 times, tell us how it went. You can see the "VISIBILITY" of winrate as high as 4bb/100 ( quite high for 6max higher stakes, or any stakes for that matter ) for lets say 20k hands - and how much fish sit for one session? This is my favourite part:   there's a limit to how often a fish will keep coming back into a game in which they _NEVER_ win. It's like you never played this game or hasn't seen how many bad beats can occur in one session.

hes played high stakes for years, he knows what hes talking about.

fish have ridiculously high lossrates. go play with a variance calculator for a fish with a -30BB/100 loss rate and 100BB/100 standard deviations over 20k hand samples. the best they can hope to do is something like -40 buyins.

hell, check the 95% confidence areas on 5k samples. fish with those winrates win over 5k hands ~1%.

Where can i find info that most fish are -30BB/100?

you dont "find " such information, you google for a good poker variance calculator , put in the expect winrate in the long run and the standard deviation and you get XX amount of graphs of how they could run in a given sample

for example :
http://pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/


and -30bb/100 winrate for fishes seem about decent if not even exaggerated

depends on the fish and depends on how tough the game is. someone like guy who isnt that bad of a player in general but plays in the toughest lineups probably has a -10BB/100 to -15BB/100 winrate in really tough games. some fish are just shooting it off like scout and are huge losers. some fish that are loose passive play in soft lineups and are still losing at a steady rate, but not that high.

i used to look people up when i grinded party and there were lots of huge losers, and these were soft lineups to begin with. cant even imagine how big of a loser someone can be in a really tough HSNL lineup

On October 16 2014 18:39 Daut wrote: like guy who isnt that bad of a player in general but plays in the toughest lineups probably has a -10BB/100 to -15BB/100 winrate in really tough games.

Most fish nowdays arent"that bad" and most regs are no Galfond. ( as most games are no HSNL) So i'd say most of the time the scenario is not that "fish never win", but for their "session" of couple hundreds of hands / week some (not insignificant % ) can "win" for weeks ;o

For -15bb/100 (big blinds) in 2k hands, ~30% of the "area" of 95% confidence interval is in the plus.

I'm curious how Daut would do 4-6 tabling 600nl over 100k hands on pokerstars these days.

Not a challenge, just curious.

edit - not a slight at all on the mathematicians' skills (he rocks), I'm curious how he'd do in todays games is all.

PS. fuck nlhe. plo is dollar dollar bills yo

edit - now that I'm more sober. I really am wondering, do you think you'd be able to pull off a ~4 bb win rate at nl600? What *are* you doing pokerwise these days anyway. Screw it, make a well already. Holy monopoly balls.

On October 17 2014 05:38 devon06atX wrote: I'm curious how Daut would do 4-6 tabling 600nl over 100k hands on pokerstars these days. Not a challenge, just curious. edit - not a slight at all on the mathematicians' skills (he rocks), I'm curious how he'd do in todays games is all. PS. fuck nlhe. plo is dollar dollar bills yo edit - now that I'm more sober. I really am wondering, do you think you'd be able to pull off a ~4 bb win rate at nl600? What *are* you doing pokerwise these days anyway. Screw it, make a well already. Holy monopoly balls.

+1 on a Daut Well. He prolly moved on to solving chess manually or something.