3 ms·
A few points: 1) Real tables go a lot slower than online poker. 2) Relying on pre-flop premium hands is bad deep-stack no limit strategy. No one is going to p
by swolchok 17y ago
A few points:
1) Real tables go a lot slower than online poker.
2) Relying on pre-flop premium hands is bad deep-stack no limit strategy. No one is going to pay you off big when you've just got top pair.
3) What would be the point of rigging Zynga poker? They have exactly one method through which they pay out (the prize for the Shootout tournament), and they fix the rate at which they pay out there.
4) You can always find a small number of users testifying to the occurrence of statistically-unlikely events. Compare with testing for ESP in the presence of random guessers: with a large pool, someone will get lucky.
- jrmurad 17y ago1) True 2) True 4) True 3) True. But I followed up. Signed in today for the first time in several months. My first hand was AA, I kid you not. Followed by: AQ,AT,66,KQ. Then the hands started to look normal. Within the remainder of the 30 minutes that I played though, sure enough, I was dealt 22 and two more deuces came on the flop. Another 4-of-a-kind. I still think something is fishy. If it is unbalanced, my guess would be that is to encourage new players or ones who haven't logged in for awhile to stay and play... boosting Zynga's numbers.
- swolchok 17y agoPresumably this could be solved by writing a hand logger. I play the Zynga Shootout regularly and would be happy to run one, though I'm not sure how one would be able to architect it simply enough that I'd be able to audit it. Perhaps if someone reverse-engineered their network protocol; it appears to be at least partially unencrypted.
- swolchok 17y agoOh, and let's not forget that this is the poker implementation where splitting a pot three ways will generate .33 chips for each person.