Statistically, over thousands of hands, players calling and
raising with weak cards or no hand should lose and be very profitable for good players who can read the
game. But this is not the case. Bad and inexperienced players are more successful than they should be
and there may well be a good reason for this.
I have read many articles
about whether or not poker sites are fixed and questions such as 'why would they when they are making millions'
and I have seen a recurring theory that I believe has merit.
Poker sites earn most of their profits from rake. The more
players playing on their site the more rake is generated. If bad and inexperienced players continually lost at
the rate they should in a fair game, they would soon go broke and would stop playing. This would
reduce the number of players and therefore reduce the total rake.
However if the game play is manipulated to reward bad play
then these players either survive longer or flourish. Good players will put their losses down to bad luck
and continue to play in the belief that they will soon hit a better run of luck. So the site benefits all
round.
In the beginning when I had just a basic knowledge of the game I
was far more successful. This is despite my game having all of the classic mistakes and weaknesses
such as slow playing pocket pairs or top pair top kicker, under
betting and giving several players the odds to call, not calling when I had the right odds to do so,
betting the river when I was only going to get called by a better hand, missing opportunities to bluff and
so on.
In the beginning my game was one dimensional but the difference
was that my pocket aces would hold up the expected number of times against one player, my drawing hands would
hit the right number of times. I could slow play sets on the flop without my opponent continually hitting
runner-runner straights or flushes. I would hit with AK around 50% of the time by the river as expected etc.
etc.
However, based on the last few years (yes years not weeks or
months) I could re write poker odds for my user name. They are completely opposite to the legions of
'players' who continue to make all the wrong decisions yet hit
runner-runner or the miracle river over and over again.
The fact is that for the first few weeks and months of my poker
playing career I could not have had any complaints if I had lost, but I didn't. I was able to
build decent bank rolls. Strangely, now that I have the benefit and experience of a
million hands of online poker (and not multi tabling) I find it is impossible to build bank
rolls. However, I now have the knowledge and confidence to
recognise that it has nothing to do with my game play or ability. My hands will just not hold up any where near
the amount that they should even taking every parameter into consideration.
Point to ponder. Has anyone else noticed that after a good run
should you have the audacity to cash-out some of your bank
roll your good run suddenly ends?
If any of the above is a result of dishonesty then it would have
to be at a very senior level though not necessarily at the very top. Dishonesty often involves one or two
individuals in high or influential positions who look for ways to make the business they work for more
profitable and then reap the rewards.
--------------------
Super Users
The official reason for
the Super User account or facility is for Poker sites to check on game play and to prevent
cheating. There are legitimate benefits in being able to see all players cards when policing activities such
as collusion, chip dumping and dishonest Super Users etc.
However unless there are rigid water tight systems in place
to prevent the miss use of this facility then the risks to the integrity of the game far out
way the benefits.
I'm sure that Super User accounts have been
used by sites in a responsible and honest manner. But it only takes one dishonest individual
on a site to destroy the integrity of that site. More than one would be even more devastating.
Simply put, would anyone give out their pin number and bank
card to complete strangers thereby allowing total
unrestricted access to their account and then trust that none of them will abuse
it.
We are doing similar to this whenever we
play poker on a site with Super User capability. They have complete control of your game.
At
Integrity Poker no members of staff will have access to Super User facilities because
the Integrity Detection System (I.D.S.) will ensure game integrity
rendering legitimate general Super User access
unnecessary.
--------------------
Collusion
Whenever cheating in poker is discussed there is often
references to collusion. It's where two or more players communicate with each other and have a collective
aim. They disclose their pocket cards and they use the information against unsuspecting
players. In some situations they
can all enter the pot thereby increasing the odds that one of them will win the
hand. It is prohibited on all sites and they will do all they
can to prevent it. However their methods may not be fully effective as it appears to be
a reasonably common occurrence. They do however have some success and there are cases of players
being reimbursed when occurrences have been identified.
I acknowledge that low level collusion or unsuccessful attempts
at it would be difficult to identify but organised profitable collusion should be detected.
There are ways of identifying players indulging in this activity
and I believe that stronger action is needed when it is discovered.
It is not to be condoned but it is relevant to say that collusion
is not as devastating to your long term profitability as super users or rigged deals that increase certain
outcomes and/or deal better hands to certain 'players').
Therefore to ensure complete integrity of the playing environment
all of the above activities must be prohibited, detected and prevented.
See: Integrity Poker's
Guarantee
--------------------
As a foot note: While writing this
page I received an email form a poker site that I have not played on for a long time. I stopped playing as
I am convinced this site is suffering from manipulation of game play and results. The email informed me
that they had placed a £50 bonus into my account.
Now, I could write books about the game patterns and
bad beats this site throws up but as it was free money I logged on and bought into a low level cash game. I
already knew exactly what would happen, in fact I wish I could have placed a bet on what would happen because
that is one bet I would have won.
I lost the very first hand to
a full house. Over the next 40 minutes I won just two
hands (5 bb's in total) and, having hit my jack on a jack high flop, I lost the final hand,
to the same 'player' who missed the flop but bet out anyway. He had Q3 off suit with
no draw and surprise surprise he hit a Q on the turn. In isolation this short
session proves nothing. But it is just typical of the vast majority of sessions that I play on this
site and a few others.
Related: Article I posted on
Poker forum
If you navigated here via a link on the
home page use your back button at the top of your browser to return to the same place on the home
page.
If not click: Home
