Jump to content

What the soft ,real or ireal ?


SCOBY

Recommended Posts

What happening  the poker soft.The   AA ,AK, AQ ,KK every time lose vs J3,  K5 , Q6, .What player playing this cards ?...... Go and play bingo man ....... 

I criticize what I don't like"!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@duckwhisperer wrote:

Nothing is happening to the soft, that's just poker, get used to it. :catvery-happy:


i really dont know about him but from my own experience i ve seen a RNG cahnge since last weeck . i do believe that they have changed something . i am -30 buy ins in a limit a crush it with closing eyes but what i have seen starting with last weeck i never ever seen in my life.

probably they loose money with the current promotions and wanna rake it more 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ran bad over 200 games last week too, I guess RNG got tweaked, It is unreal!

Lose money with promo :robotlol:. Thats all worked out pre-promo. There is no way they lost money unless nobody played which clearly isn't the case.

Not actually Old.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was not saying loosing money in the real way , saying that they had no profit

first weeck it was a lot of activity and you could start first session during all mornings , starting with second weeck was less activity , probably 3th times less than first weeck and third weeck was almost the same with the second.now i see more activity in the games .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know wth you guys are talking about, but then again I never understand what polarbear is talking about. 

The RNG is named like that because it is random, just cause you got hit by some variance (probably over a small sample size) doesn't mean anyone tweaked anything.

And I think that it's gonna be annoying for the unibet guys to read this post and post a reply ( if they do), even tho they are always polite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@duckwhisperer wrote:

Don't know wth you guys are talking about, but then again I never understand what polarbear is talking about. 

The RNG is named like that because it is random, just cause you got hit by some variance (probably over a small sample size) doesn't mean anyone tweaked anything.

And I think that it's gonna be annoying for the unibet guys to read this post and post a reply ( if they do), even tho they are always polite.



@duckwhisperer wrote:

Don't know wth you guys are talking about, but then again I never understand what polarbear is talking about. 

The RNG is named like that because it is random, just cause you got hit by some variance (probably over a small sample size) doesn't mean anyone tweaked anything.

And I think that it's gonna be annoying for the unibet guys to read this post and post a reply ( if they do), even tho they are always polite.


i was saying only my own opinion.you have the option to skip my post.i am not saying that is not random ony that something has been changed. is something that every poker site is doing at some point when they do change something to take another line , but of course is still random.

and may i ask you how many days / weeck and hours/day do you play on unibet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@duckwhisperer wrote:

What do you think they changed then? Could you please explain? I really don't understand. And I don't play here that often lately but do not think that it is relevant to the conversation. 


play 10 hours/day and 7 days/weeck for at least one month and after that you will answer yourself to your question.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@polarbear wrote:


@duckwhisperer wrote:

What do you think they changed then? Could you please explain? I really don't understand. And I don't play here that often lately but do not think that it is relevant to the conversation. 


play 10 hours/day and 7 days/weeck for at least one month and after that you will answer yourself to your question.

 



Well, I don't have that much time to play so I guess I won't find out the secret truth that only true grinders like polarbear do.

Sorry that I questioned you. (Still don't have an idea of what your talking about :smileyvery-happy: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying the RNG changed still implies you think theyre controling something which is not factual. Poker sites make money off rake, it doesnt matter to them who wins or who loses. There are many conspiracy theories floating around but none have ever been validated. Unibet has no incentive to unfairly deal the cards.
I debate
Should I smile like everything's good and pretend that life is great
Or should I let the world see the real me and not hide this pain
I tried to be like the rest of y'all, sorry I just can't
I'ma probably die this way
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Magicadil wrote:

Saying the RNG changed still implies you think theyre controling something which is not factual. Poker sites make money off rake, it doesnt matter to them who wins or who loses. There are many conspiracy theories floating around but none have ever been validated. Unibet has no incentive to unfairly deal the cards.

 

Actually that is not quite right. They always say they want to keep recreational players alive as long as possible. So why not let a guy win a SNG (or an important all in) with pure luck (runner runner straight or flush for example)? When I m on crazy-ape-tilt-mode I always think it has to be rigged so that players can play longer (equals rake more). But when I m grounded again and can think reasonably again, I know that it is just variance. AA has to lose vs lower pocket pairs due to probability 1 of 5 times, just basic math. Plus you always concentrate more on hands that you lost painfully than on hands that you won by pure luck. When you win with a lot of luck, you may just say "That was about ****** time", even if it is the exact same situation. The only difference is that you benefit from it and so you are happy with what happened and do not question any of it. If you lose on the other hand, you question everything. You had bad luck, so it has to be rigged.. There is no other explanation. :smileyembarrassed:

NO MORE HALF-MEASURES.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SCOBY You must understand your competition! They are people that play 'sports betting' and sometime they play poker '4fun' but in the long run if you make the best decision you will win! So stop complaining and focus on making good decisions :) #hffirstthengl
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@Magicadil wrote:

Saying the RNG changed still implies you think theyre controling something which is not factual. Poker sites make money off rake, it doesnt matter to them who wins or who loses. There are many conspiracy theories floating around but none have ever been validated. Unibet has no incentive to unfairly deal the cards.


What this guy said :D

Stop complaining and reload fish :-0>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, no the RNG didn't change at any point - it is a random number generator, so by it's very nature we don't have a lever we can pull to change which direction the variance goes in for which players. This also implies that the whole of our team is dishonest at best, which is kind of sad. It also implies that Unibet (a public listed company) would be willing to sacrifice everything to force a few players to lose at poker. It's also worth pointing out that Poker accounts for around 3% of Unibet's total revenue - even if we had the ability to and were evil enough to decide one day that we wanted SCOBY, Polarbear and Oldburf to lose, it would be a pretty dumb move.

If you're playing 10 hours per day for 7 days per week (or whatever the time period quoted was) then you are going to be see more periods of heavy variance, simply due to the fact that you are playing more. And although we want to keep new and casual players alive for longer, it is a huge jump to suggest that we rig an RNG to achieve that goal! This is actually achieved by the way rewards and promotions are configured and who we primarily try to attract to the site. I've personally played around 5 million hands of poker online at various sites and concur that variance in poker can be beyond brutal at times, but that is the nature of the beast and it's not because the site has decided you should lose. There is a reason nobody likes to hear bad beat stories - once you have played a certain amount yourself, you have seen it all before (and possibly worse).

I mentioned it in another thread, but 'Fooled by Randomness' is a very good book on the subject. I don't think we as humans are set up to be able to fully comprehend variance and so it's often easier to jump to a conclusion like this.

“Heroes are heroes because they are heroic in behavior, not because they won or lost.”
― Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@DavidP_Unibet wrote:

Firstly, no the RNG didn't change at any point - it is a random number generator, so by it's very nature we don't have a lever we can pull to change which direction the variance goes in for which players. This also implies that the whole of our team is dishonest at best, which is kind of sad. It also implies that Unibet (a public listed company) would be willing to sacrifice everything to force a few players to lose at poker. It's also worth pointing out that Poker accounts for around 3% of Unibet's total revenue - even if we had the ability to and were evil enough to decide one day that we wanted SCOBY, Polarbear and Oldburf to lose, it would be a pretty dumb move.


I just want to say again that I was being sarcastic/jokey with my post regarding RNG tweakage. :robottongue:

Not actually Old.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@DavidP_Unibet wrote:

Firstly, no the RNG didn't change at any point - it is a random number generator, so by it's very nature we don't have a lever we can pull to change which direction the variance goes in for which players. This also implies that the whole of our team is dishonest at best, which is kind of sad. It also implies that Unibet (a public listed company) would be willing to sacrifice everything to force a few players to lose at poker. It's also worth pointing out that Poker accounts for around 3% of Unibet's total revenue - even if we had the ability to and were evil enough to decide one day that we wanted SCOBY, Polarbear and Oldburf to lose, it would be a pretty dumb move.

If you're playing 10 hours per day for 7 days per week (or whatever the time period quoted was) then you are going to be see more periods of heavy variance, simply due to the fact that you are playing more. And although we want to keep new and casual players alive for longer, it is a huge jump to suggest that we rig an RNG to achieve that goal! This is actually achieved by the way rewards and promotions are configured and who we primarily try to attract to the site. I've personally played around 5 million hands of poker online at various sites and concur that variance in poker can be beyond brutal at times, but that is the nature of the beast and it's not because the site has decided you should lose. There is a reason nobody likes to hear bad beat stories - once you have played a certain amount yourself, you have seen it all before (and possibly worse).

I mentioned it in another thread, but 'Fooled by Randomness' is a very good book on the subject. I don't think we as humans are set up to be able to fully comprehend variance and so it's often easier to jump to a conclusion like this.


 

Great post, David!

Sooo much truth in there, thanks for taking the time although you didnt have to reply! 

Also, a lot less people would play poker if there weren´t bad beats! That is what makes the game interesting and way more exciting. Everyone - literally everyone - can win against the best player in the world short term. Where besides poker is that possible? In tennis? Football? Chess? You always have a chance of winning - even with 27o vs AA, you can always turn it around and win the hand. And if that wouldnt be possible, if the better hand would always win, Poker would be kind of boring. 

NO MORE HALF-MEASURES.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@OldBurf wrote:


@DavidP_Unibet wrote:

Firstly, no the RNG didn't change at any point - it is a random number generator, so by it's very nature we don't have a lever we can pull to change which direction the variance goes in for which players. This also implies that the whole of our team is dishonest at best, which is kind of sad. It also implies that Unibet (a public listed company) would be willing to sacrifice everything to force a few players to lose at poker. It's also worth pointing out that Poker accounts for around 3% of Unibet's total revenue - even if we had the ability to and were evil enough to decide one day that we wanted SCOBY, Polarbear and Oldburf to lose, it would be a pretty dumb move.


I just want to say again that I was being sarcastic/jokey with my post regarding RNG tweakage. :robottongue:


Apologies for referencing you then! Doomswitch de-activated ;)

“Heroes are heroes because they are heroic in behavior, not because they won or lost.”
― Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@GotWhatItTakes wrote:


@DavidP_Unibet wrote:

Firstly, no the RNG didn't change at any point - it is a random number generator, so by it's very nature we don't have a lever we can pull to change which direction the variance goes in for which players. This also implies that the whole of our team is dishonest at best, which is kind of sad. It also implies that Unibet (a public listed company) would be willing to sacrifice everything to force a few players to lose at poker. It's also worth pointing out that Poker accounts for around 3% of Unibet's total revenue - even if we had the ability to and were evil enough to decide one day that we wanted SCOBY, Polarbear and Oldburf to lose, it would be a pretty dumb move.

If you're playing 10 hours per day for 7 days per week (or whatever the time period quoted was) then you are going to be see more periods of heavy variance, simply due to the fact that you are playing more. And although we want to keep new and casual players alive for longer, it is a huge jump to suggest that we rig an RNG to achieve that goal! This is actually achieved by the way rewards and promotions are configured and who we primarily try to attract to the site. I've personally played around 5 million hands of poker online at various sites and concur that variance in poker can be beyond brutal at times, but that is the nature of the beast and it's not because the site has decided you should lose. There is a reason nobody likes to hear bad beat stories - once you have played a certain amount yourself, you have seen it all before (and possibly worse).

I mentioned it in another thread, but 'Fooled by Randomness' is a very good book on the subject. I don't think we as humans are set up to be able to fully comprehend variance and so it's often easier to jump to a conclusion like this.


 

Great post, David!

Sooo much truth in there, thanks for taking the time although you didnt have to reply! 

Also, a lot less people would play poker if there weren´t bad beats! That is what makes the game interesting and way more exciting. Everyone - literally everyone - can win against the best player in the world short term. Where besides poker is that possible? In tennis? Football? Chess? You always have a chance of winning - even with 27o vs AA, you can always turn it around and win the hand. And if that wouldnt be possible, if the better hand would always win, Poker would be kind of boring. 


Agreed, if the variance was removed from poker then it would be a much less interesting game.

I still play in my spare time (tournaments on other sites unfortunately as I can't play at Unibet) and I'll have days when I seem to suffer all of my worst beats at crucial stages of tournaments, and my brain will start to think "this is so unfair". On days when luck goes generally in my favour, my brain often doesn't volunteer to recognise this fact.

I'm actually going to add a quote from the book I mentioned to my signature, but I will leave you with one from that book for now which I think is relevant to poker players and the example I gave above. :)

“When things go our way we reject the lack of certainty.” 

“Heroes are heroes because they are heroic in behavior, not because they won or lost.”
― Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...