If you've played much on any of the various poker sites throughout the net, you've experienced your share of frustration and bothersome "norms" (you may have grown to expect while playing at actual tables,) being turned on their heads. You will eventually see patterns attributable to the "in common" "randomizer" all sites boast of using and its "unquestionable" integrity.
But I'm here to tell you that's a load of crap. And it is.
If you've objected to your experiences, of course, you're told by some CSR, whose only claim to job requirement is the same scripting telemarketers use,
"we use an impartial radomizer bonded with Le Big Deal Bonding New York Firm Whose Name Will Impress You and they certify its reliability".
Yeah, well that plastic bubble boat don't float. Not when you submit your play of an adequate number of hands to statistical analysis, not when you repeatedly see small percentage make hands beat you out on the river in
Texas High Hold Em, and by players who, by playing in that manner, don't end in crash and burn (as you would) but go on to the final table...vastly too many times.
Now when I say statistical analysis, don't surmise I mean something you need some scientific expertise and/or some intricate, elaborate and expensive software to accomplish. If you will but sport around you will find poker lessons offered that come complete with that statistical work already done for you. That tells you how often to expect a certain hand to win at a certain
game with a certain number of players.
Simply submit, if you are going to be playing long and hard on any site, your play to this type of statistical expectation. After you've recorded at least 10,000 hands (not so rare among dedicated players,) you have a fair basis for comparison.
You will find disparities. Because the randomizer ain't random. It's either been hacked, twicked to suit a site's predisposition on how to best promote itself, or simply to better aid planted shills working for the house.
Don't be surprised, when you complain to the management, getting the typical scripted response, your statistical expectation gets even further skewed. That's
been my experience every time I have. It's called reprisal.
Now take note that the CSR you come in contact with, when you get further into the matter than, "I'm not happy..." and the script hasn't sufficed, (especially
any mention of statistical analysis) gets awfully quiet. Now you will be referred to officialdom that prompts out nothing more than another regurgitated script with more wording. And there the matter will die unless you find
some online forum that can get the word out like this one.
I can justifiably complain of all these things with PurePlay Poker, but let me add one interesting little turn of the screw.
Shortly their recent promotion for one entry into the WSOP will host its Final. To gain entry, you must play in a qualifier and then a semi-final.
Something odd happened to me on the last table of one of those semi-finals.
Let me elaborate first on one thing. I've been online playing for over 10 years. Party Poker, Gaming Club Poker, PurePlay back when it was BetZip. And about a dozen others at various times. Hell, I even had a
person draw out on me in the Gaming Club's annual $250,000 tourney when it had reduced down to the last 20 players and I was poised to be chip leader. I had an aces over kings full house on the flop with no
two in-suit cards on the board and the winner hit two perfect cards on the turn and river to make a straight flush! One might ask how a player can get that far and take such a leap...and then make such a hand.
It can happen. It can happen honestly.
But what I'm about to tell you doesn't.
Now, back to the last table of a semi-final to win a seat in the promo final to win one seat at the WSOP on PurePlay. We're down to six players. I have a "medium" position with more chips than three of the other players, but the remaining two chip leaders have five times what I have.
I notice that when the blinds are on the three that have fewer chips than me and, for a while, for many various times throughout the proceeding 30 to 40 minutes of play that the blinds take these players to virtually all-ins, the two chip leaders are not making final calls
when they already have pumped the weaker players up with bets and calls and don't put in the final pittance of chips they have left.
Over and over again. While the chip leader to my right is all-ining me every time the blinds are on me. Until the inevitable happens and I am gang-banged out of an entry I would otherwise have likely won.
This isn't an anomaly. The duration and repeated execution of what was going on rules that out. And when I objected one of the chip leaders involved stated, "well, I don't want to give weaker stacks more chips".
Well, that was exactly what he was doing, just not threatening to recover any with the final few chips it would take to call. Over and over again.
Had I made myself unwelcome on PurePlay? So much so they would design something like this? Well yes, I had discussed that statistical analysis thing there before.
But designed it was. In all my some 250,000 hands of poker I estimate I have played in my life, I have never seen anything like this.
Of course the CSR I consulted did nothing although she claimed it would be "addressed". In a few days it will be too late to matter and it has become evident they are waiting that out.
So I demanded the year's subscription fees I'd paid back and told them what to do with themselves. Let's see if that does any good.
What online poker needs, obviously, is to be thoroughly investigated and then turned over to management by something other than notoriously corruptible geeks (who will even try to hack a toaster.)
On the horizon looms an encroaching federal government looking for yet another excuse to encroach more. And these greedy fools are giving them one.