100HourChallenge

Scotland played exciting, despite their loss. Could be a potential upset against England. May be worth a bet at 11 odds...

4 hours ago, Jami-Unibet said:

1	x	2
2.80	3.05	3.00
	x

1	x	2
1.80	3.40	5.75
	x

1	x	2
1.40	4.80	10.00
x

 

Get your predictions in! Please read the original post before: Here

 

And this 10 euro bet have to be on one match. Just checking that you did that as well.

I tried betting 5.50 euros on two matches, and that will not give a ticket...

6 hours ago, laifstaile said:

where i can find leaderboard?

Haha, totally support this. But the first round is not even finished yet;) Maybe wait until monday? 🙂

26 minutes ago, Howlett1979 said:

Hi.

Thanks for the reply.

I am not so bothered with bad beats. I am more conserned over the overflow of "TV moments" that online poker is providing. 

Bad beats are common in bough live and online poker, and thats part of the game. Online, though, the probabilities are hard to calculate since there often are no ends to the "magical outcomes" around the table.

Its like its supposed to be this neverending action-packed gambling machine, wich is really addictive. 

Since you ask, to me a bad beat is when AA is beaten by K-9o or a flush with A on top is rivered away with a house. Its too much of this nonsense online.

Straights are starting to feel more common than two pairs.

As for the big stack winning, its what I am used to see online, and this is someting many, many thousand players are seeing as well.

I do not know how I can get statistics on the matter... but again, the biggest stack will and can call more, so maybe thats the reason to give it the benefit of the doubt.

What kind of tournaments will you recommend to meet more serious players?

AA vs K9o, yeah certainly a bad beat, but not impossible. K9o has 12.1-13.7% to win allin preflop. To check if this is actually occurring we need to find out if the K9o is actually winning more than this. If it's winning 20% of the time, something is fishy. If it's winning only 8%, something is also wrong...

Fortunately there are people who check that poker sites generate cards randomly, and they haven't found these things (it would be really bad for a poker site, as people wouldn't trust it and stop playing. They earn more by dealing fair). They check if each and every hand win as much as they should in allin situations, for example.

I know it's hard for you to find these numbers, but right now you're just telling us to take your word, which doesn't prove anything. There are thousands of people who feel one thing or another, but that doesn't necessarily make them right, even if they think they are on to something.

If you want to play against world class players, just join the high roller games on poker stars, or any big site. Just don't expect to win too much 😉 I prefer playing against fish, even though it means I suffer lots of bad beats 😄 

Best of luck in your games!

14 hours ago, Howlett1979 said:

Thanks for your reply.

I have seen most of these videos and for me there are still some problems here.

1. Yes, the speed is higher, but that should simply not make a good player below avarage, and a bad player a big winner. The same odds should apply, but sadly and obviously they do not.

2. "Nothing is impossible" is just as valid for religious claims as for the claim that online poker is random and fair. My claim can be "online poker is rigged", then you say "prove it" and I say "nothing is impossible". And around we go...

My claim is that from a statistical point of view, the things happening online is not impossible, but far from common or realistic. I do not see that the best players win, simple as that. I see bad players win, over and over, like if math, statistics and RNG's do not work the same way in this digital world. If someone has only played online they will have no clue to how unrealistic online poker actually is.

That being said, the online community is packed full with clueless morons that plays poker likes its a slot-machine. I do NOT see more serious players, like one video claims. All-in, all-in, all-in... Does this work in real life? Not often, but to some degree. Does it work online? Hell yes, and in the most incredible ways and against all odds. The defenders of online poker will call it "bad beats", while a good player will call it ridicilous when it goes past a certain point. You have to understand that tens of thousands of players do not react to improbable outcomes every now and then, they react to the endless amount of them online.

And one "phenomenon" is so repated online that if players dont see it, they must be blind or in denial:

When the biggest stack face one of the smallest stacks, he gets what he needs on the table in 80-90% of the showdowns. There are no mathematical or statistical ways around it, other than the religious claim that "nothing is impossible". 

For me, the justification for all the "TV-moments" on online poker is rather weak. If something is highly improbable, then there are major reasons to either reject it as nonsense or demand proof for the claim that it's belivable. Online poker-defenders seem to often turn this problem upside-down.

To put it in other words, its not the players responibility to prove if there is any foul play at work. Its the provider of the software that has to prove that their product is fair and trustworthy if tens of thousands players do not trust it from their experience and observations. You ask, why should we not trust it? I ask, why should we?

I am off course waiting for someone to ask "why would they risk being called out for foul play"? Well, actually they do not risk anything. They are providers of addiction and gambling from unregulated islands and countries. Who would shut them down? Look at Dieselgate and Volkswagon. Same logic there, but they still did it and with higher risk in countries where there are regulations, and they are still selling cars like there is no tomorrow. This happens all the time in big business. The risk is worth the payoff. We are talking billions here. The more action, the more money flows quicker through the system in the gambling world.

These are still just my thoughts and examples, but still something to take into consideration.

I am not saying "don't trust online poker". I am simply asking, why do you thrust it when there are so many improbable outcomes over and over again around these digital tables?

 

Hi Howlett!

I appreciate your comments and concerns. As a fellow player who have gone through many bad beats;)

I wonder where do you get your statistics from however? Big stacks gets what they need 80-90% of the time... I don't think the argument holds up when you just throw in a random number like this, which I'm not sure can be supported with any evidence.

Sure, there are lots of bad beats online, but thats because we play a lot of hands, so they seem to happen all the time.

Also, what do you count as a bad beat? 67 vs 33 percent? 80 vs 20 percent? Even getting a runner runner straight is quite important for your chances winning a hand. Of course, it may only be 5-10 percent difference, but that can change a lot. Rather than being 80-20, the situation may be more 70-30. This of course feels very bad for the player who had the best hand, but the opponent did in fact have a 30 per cent chance of winning the hand.

If you add in that the player in the lead may not bet high enough to protect their hand, it may give the opponent the 'right' odds to call.

Of course, bad players often call when they shouldn't, which leads to more bad beats being realised. In higher quality games, the opponents know how to fold at the right time, and don't realise their 'luck'.

Therefore the worse the players, the more bad beats will occur. But the worse the players, the better the games. So, as frustrating as a bad beat can be, it's best to take it with a smile and say 'nice hand', gg, good luck, to your opponent.

Thats my 5 cents.

7 minutes ago, Jami-Unibet said:

First matches to predict on below!

Please read the original thread first: HERE

Belgium vs. Russia

1	x	2
2.02	3.45	4.55
x

Denmark vs. Finland

1	x	2
1.34	5.10	11.50
	x

England vs. Croatia

1	x	2
1.65	3.90	6.20
	x

Austria vs. North Macedonia

1	x	2
1.75	3.50	6.00
	x

Netherlands vs. Ukraine

1	x	2
1.68	3.85	5.90
	x

 

Please post your predictions for these matches on this thread only. If the predictions are posted anywhere else, they will not be counted to the final score.

Let me know if you have any questions, best of luck! 

On 6/4/2021 at 10:48 AM, Pionrj said:

My best untill now is two goals. But I'm a bit confused. Earlier when keeper saved first shot I got a second chance. Today no second chances and keeper saved three out of my four attempts.

At the beginning of each week you're given an extra token. Did you account for this one? I have scored 3/7 so far...

I totally support that there should be something for cash + SNG/hexa players, I just struggle to see how to create some system that would reward the 'community player'. I think the options mentioned are not bad, but not great either. So would be interesting if some brilliant mind came up with a great idea of how to create an exciting competition for everyone...

I agree, I don't think option 2 and 3 will add much to any community players. These prizes will exclusively be taken by the highest 'grinders'. And most of us will not even have a chance...

I think probably a few different leaderboards around MTTs would be better...