Hi all, I see a big difference on replay poker compared to paid poker sites in terms of boards. There is a huge number of flops or boards with pairs on replay. There’s more full touch than straight. What do you think?
thank you
1 Like
This quote can be found in the Replay poker FAQ section:
Sarah
We guarantee that the RNG we use in our poker software and our shuffling algorithm are 100% fair, random, and not “rigged” in any way.
To prove that our RNG is truly random, it has recently been tested at iTech Labs, one of the leading accredited laboratories for online gaming certification. iTech Labs found that “the card sequences are unpredictable, non-repeatable and uniformly distributed.”
The numbers generated by our RNG have passed Marsagalia’s “diehard” tests for statistical randomness.
The dealer program has no regard for player history or what cards you’ve been dealt in the past, nor does it account for the cards that have been dealt previously at the table. On each hand, a new deck is created, then it is shuffled, and then it randomly generates each individual card as it is dealt to the player on the table. It does not calculate the types of hands that will be dealt and it certainly does not favor one player over another.
Our system does not take into account where players are sitting, hand history, spending history, chip amounts, player location, gender, moderation actions, or anything else. When you’re dealing hundreds of thousands of hands every day, there’s every likelihood of receiving patterns of hands that appear not to be random. In the same way as when playing roulette, you occasionally see long strings of black or red. It’s all a part of the long tail distribution of possible outcomes.
Another factor to be aware of when playing online poker with play chips is that other players are more likely to play more freely with their chips than they would be at a physical table with real cash. Some players will go all-in frequently with their free chips or make large bets wildly. In some cases, these players have good luck in a hand and end up winning the hand. Rather than assuming that the player knew what was going to appear on the table, it’s important to recognize that poker is a game of luck as much as it is one of skill and that everyone has good luck sometimes.
7 Likes
I play small cash poker sites and see some very strange boards like here–THE reason is because we see MANY more hands online than the casino and great hands and boards happen more often…It is just as fair here as any place, trust me, i am old and seen a lot of hands in different formats:)
7 Likes
I have been beat so many times by runner, runner after the flop it is not in the realm of probobility. I am getting tired of this. You can tell us that it is random all you want to. The odds are against this happening so many times. I have played on here since 2014. I almost can tell what cards are coming after the flop/. It is not even good poker. Clean up your programing. It is no longer fun playing here with your programing rewarding bad poker play. Poker should have skill play involved. On here it is just luck that you are not killed by a bad hand being repaid. So much for my ranting.
3 Likes
Replay is RNG certified as mentioned before. Poker is a game of patience, we all will have streaks of both bad luck & good luck. The skill is how we play our hands in both cases. I hope everyone has a streak of good luck, however it won’t happen if we don’t play our hands well.
4 Likes
So you play on here now 10 years, even though you think it is not real poker --lmao:)… Funny my friend, and it is fun, free and normal as cash sites:).
1 Like
you can justify all you want about your RNG ,there was a site years ago claiming the same thing only it was a cash site it was later revealed that they were criminal using bots to steal millions from their clients completely corrupt almost destroying online poker i will never give any online site money there are hundreds of complaint that your site is fixed but you silence everyone , and the complaints are coming from poker players, ive been playing longer than some of you have been alive i have never seen the outcome that you claim are not fixed especially for american players or low ranking chip buyers say what you want your i rarely play on your site any more so who cares but your site is fixed in my experience oh yeah buy the way site is designed to make money to pay your salaries there is a direct coralation to rewards to your chip buyers and they are the ones that dont complain about the poker but complain about abusive players that speak there minds its simple
3 Likes
Your funny, i am American and muted and deserve it—BUT i do not buy chips, do not belong to leagues (been invited to many), do not pay for monthly things etc. AND i been playing about 27 months here and play only a little and built about 35 million chips from just playing decent (sometimes good i guess) poker )…So, you saying this site is letting me win–geez, i feel like i should send them a TY text now:)…AND, i am older and played most everywhere and did play on a site YEARS ago ( cash ) that had bots but ppl. like me figured it out in 5 minutes and they were offshore and not regulated…Now i play small cash games on regulated sites and the outcome is the same is here (guess they like me also and let me win )…lmao
2 Likes
I do not-------MANY bad beats and great hands-on paid sites 2- because we SEEEEE so many more hands than home games or casino-----Just yesterday my quads beat a house and i lost with a house to a straight flush ( small cash game ) as i saw SO many hands in 4 hours, it happens:).
2 Likes
just so we are clear, there is no RNG in this software. What there is is a Pseudo random number generator. The difference is a pseudo generator knows what numbers it has chosen.
So repeating what is technically a mistruth should be avoided.
So if replay has their generator tested, it means nothing because there are less than ten lines of code in a generator and all you have to do is look at the code to tell if its plays true.
What replay needs to do to convince me, is not just have a few lines of code lifted from the software, they need to have the software tested in its entirety.
1 Like
Without knowing exactly how Replay have implemented their RNG, what typical happens is that you periodically seed a pseudo RNG with a high entropy source. Regardless of how they are doing it, the fact that it’s certified means it passed a whole bunch of statistical tests that demonstrate it’s essentially indistinguishable from a true RNG.
Aside from that, If you read the certification, you’ll see it is not just for the RNG but also the shuffle.
3 Likes
1 Like
Regardless of how they are doing it, the fact that it’s certified means it passed a whole bunch of statistical tests that demonstrate it’s essentially indistinguishable from a true RNG.
Omaha Hi Lo - A Replay player can look at his cards and the flop thousands of times. Eventually, observing a pattern of winning hands.
It dawns on the player that the ability to solve cryptograms is useful here.
If the winner of the hand is already decided, then halfway through the hand a player can decipher by utilizing his crypto skills what comes next.
So, the two that will come on the river say, will compliment your A3 holding combo for the nut low.
If you see it happening over and over again, the way Replay sets up the winner of the hand,
it will become a pattern to anticipate.
Lately, just holding a KQ is a pattern they use for a boat winner. So, if you see a KQ on the flop, then a very high percentage of the time another K or Q hits.
Anticipate and bet accordingly.
That’s an example of, let’s call it “Algorithmic Crypto Play”
The crypto aspect can be as simple as noticing you would’ve won the hands every time you held an 8.
Just an 8 and either an 882 flop comes or some miracle way you win on the river.
So preflop, seeing an 8 in your hand and you bet big.
Your opponent probably will call you a donk, but you will win the hand.
Goatsoup asked me once after I beat him, " How do you win?"
We had a strong enough friendship where I felt comfortable enough to say, " I play against you "
I still laugh about it, but I am very good at solving cryptograms.
That would be a true answer to Goatsoup’s question long ago.
Remember, finding patterns in the cryptogram is the way to solve it.
So, finding patterns in the cards is the way to anticipate what’s coming next.
So, it is essentially indistinguishable from a true RNG after all.
The key word being “essentially”
Yet, there is a way for a player to have some advantage play by thinking differently.
Combine that with your solid poker play and you’ll win your share of Replay tournaments.
1 Like
There are 6,497,400 possible hole card combinations for Omaha (the suits and order the cards are dealt matters in this case, because a different order means the deck was shuffled differently). No-one on this site has played even half that many hands, so even if the shuffle was completely deterministic, it would be impossible to tell just from observation. You’re not going to solve a cryptogram with a 6.5M character alphabet where half the encoded letters are missing.
One doesn’t need to solve it, just let the trend point you in the right direction.
Striving for 100% accuracy isn’t the point here.
Just taking what we know like Paklao mentioned noticing more pairs on the flop.
It could be anything, whatever is trending like red or black on the roulette wheel.
It could be noticing that when you do win a hand, it tends to be streaky.
Entering first in a tournament and having a higher win percentage.
Blend it in with your normal game and take advantage of what the sites current trend is giving you.
Similar to your opponent’s tendency what they give you as you play the player.
I get what you’re saying, but I don’t see how there’s an edge to be gained here.
Roulette is a good starting point. Real roulette wheels all do have a bias, but it would have to be a terrible wheel for the red/black ratio to be off enough that you can overcome the houses advantage. If you can figure out which numbers come up more often than expected then you can win, but that requires observing at least thousands of spins. (It has been done though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNyVwgrF4eM)
That for a game with only 37 outcomes though. A deck of cards can be in ~8×10^67 different orders. Plus, if Replay’s RNG has any bias at all, it so small that it is undetectable with the best statistical tools we have. There’s just no way for any bias to be detectable, even after playing millions of hands.
I give you a lot of credit for trying to exploit the patterns you see instead of whining though. I’m also not denying that those trends might exist, it’s just that if they are that obvious and predictable, it has to be because the site is rigged and isn’t generating random shuffles at all. Having a higher win percentage if you enter a tournament first would certainly require some sort of manipulation right?
(I would also be interested to know how one might exploit having more paired flops than expected? The only thing I can think of is to open more pocket pairs and less suited hands, but then I see most players opening all pocket pairs from every position already)
Thank you for the roulette video and kind words.
I know this algorithm topic has been thoroughly discussed here for years.
It may be time to quietly walk away from it.
I’m sure another algorithm thread will eventually pop up like a weed.
I just need time to clear my mind.
As always, I certainly enjoy reading your mathematical insights and knowledge on the subject.
Comprehending them fully is another matter!
This example above is actually a simple way to get started thinking differently.
Just keeping track of the outcomes when one eight is in your hand.
You could note the other cards as well during a winning hand.
At the time of this hand, a single eight wasn’t winning much if at all.
Compare that to the KQ holding and flopping KQ it was 2 for 2 rivering the best hand.
The more of these patterns you are aware of that currently have a high percentage of winning,
the better chances you have to do well in a tournament.
So, to answer at least one of your questions," are the patterns obvious and predictable "
Yes!
They can be very much so!
In Omaha Hi Lo for the longest time on Replay, getting dealt the ace of hearts and another heart is
golden. So much so that many players at the table have commented on it.
It has the highest win percentage I’ve ever seen. You could sit through the entire tournament
and just wait until that combo comes up and you’d do well. The flop has two hearts and rarely
will not give you the third. This is the greatest evidence that the site isn’t generating random shuffles
IMO.
Entering the tournament first came about after watching Goatsoup win so much.
He was notorious for entering first.
I took note and did the same for the most part during the first quarter of the Nordic Warriors league.
Managed to win 5 that quarter.
It’s a phenomenon.
Having more paired flops than expected isn’t on my radar at all so I really have no comment on that.
Bottom line is possibly, like the roulette wheel, we’re witnessing one heck of run of reds.
All 20 lights are lit up red right now concerning the ace of hearts and another heart pattern.
Wouldn’t want to be too quick to say Replay’s shuffle isn’t random.
I have never bothered to analyze hole cards or flop distributions on Replay, so I don’t have any evidence that they are or are not random.
I did read the testing methodology used in the certification process though, and there’s just no way for a shuffle to pass those tests and not be so close to truly random that it makes no difference.
The funny thing is, the problem with bad pRNG’s is usually that they never produce the outlier outcomes like getting 20 reds in a row, so they actually appear more random to us humans (but those flaws make it easier for computers to determine their internal state).
Anyway, the funny thing about the gamblers fallacy, which is kind of related, is that it’s not actually -EV. If you think a black must be due because there’s been 20 reds in a row, then you’d be wrong, but betting on black doesn’t win or lose any more than betting on red. So if you think you can spot patterns, then you’re probably not losing much even if you’re wrong, as long as you don’t over commit.
1 Like