In fact, I had Quads just yesterday. I almost felt sorry for the other players at the table.
Yup. All 4 in a row same table same deck of cards.
-
Every SINGLE saturday night during the recent pandemic I played play-chip (no money, just chips) games with my friends at my homeā¦ And we saw the VERY SAME āanomaliesā people blame replay poker for. Thatās interesting, isnāt it? No itās not. When thereās no real money at stake, they all become ābraveā all of a suddenā¦ And a double pair made by a 3-5 unsuited will āmagicallyā beat a A-A guy when he was going all in. UBELIVABLE! THE SISTEM IS RIGGED! - no itās not. The issue here is that You were just an idiot at going all in in a palce where people donāt give a f-X about money.
-
Whatās even worse, I studied STATS SCIENCE, PART 1 back when I graduated in ecomics. I had to repeat the damned āSTATS, part 1ā exam three f-XXXing times before passing it because stats is a kind of mathemathic so complexā¦ you wonāt believe. Seriously, you have no idea and some comments here are the nail on the coffin that noā¦conspiracy theoriesā guys have no clue what they are talking about. They are 100% ignorant. Based on what I learnt when I was inside the universityā¦ The objections made by accusers against replaypoker.comā¦ are nothing but plain BS. I know what they think they seeā¦ I know they are sincere. I am not saying that. What I am saying is that my stats professor would laugh at the reasons that make you conspiracy people āseeā that site is rigged (which is not).
-
Between the most ridicolous objections I readā¦ 1) people blaming they lose every time they go all in with AA. Oh, come onā¦ Seriously, manā¦!?! If you have to blame for the result of going all in with AAā¦ you donāt even know the basics of this game. Over. 2 )people blaming because they see too many AA, KK, QQ after playing dailyā¦ for months? For years? Seriously? Have you ever thought that with no money at stake MAYBE you are playing JUST A LITTLE MORE than āactualā poker? JUST A LITTLEā¦ JUST MAYBEā¦
- the nail on the coffin? The secret of becoming a āgoodā/ādecentā poker player starts from poker stats and understanding how they CHANGE according to WHERE you play. Becoming a decent player starts when you UNDERSTAND the difference between a 4 people table and a 9 people table. Or āonline playchipsā poker VS āreal moneyā poker (because when people change their behaviours whe dealing with real moneyā¦ And so the stats change accordingly). Or how stats change when you play face to face āplaychips pokerā VS online playchips poker.
Yes. Even that can make a difference. You see people doing things in ring games that they would never do during multi-table tournments.
And when itās evening nght and you are face to face with your friends and drinking beers, when thereās no money on the table (just playchips)ā¦ even there you will see slightly different stats.
First you learn the stats, and THEN you make the strategy.
But if you donāt know the stats, just please donāt say no BS against this website.
Because you are just sayingā¦
āI am a bad poker player, so bad that I think this site is riggedā
1 Like
Too bad that people canāt present their case for or against the site being rigged without dragging those who have a different opinion.
I have yet to see convincing evidence that the site is rigged, but have seen no evidence that those who think it is rigged have to be āidiotsā or ābad players.ā
Be logically consistent. If someone insists on hard evidence to prove one claim, they should provide hard evidence when making another.
We should debate the claim, not bash those making the claims.
4 Likes
Iām not sure if I am a Good or Bad player ā¦ Is it rigged? Is the post flop juiced to create "excitement? ā¦ But what I can say with out a shadow of a doubt that I would never play for real cash using the program run here ā¦ Saying that I still enjoy the madness that Replay brings to some of my days 
2 Likes
Every single hand almost at least two players get winnable hands. I canāt even count how many times pots are split in a tourney. The algorithm is broken. Iāve seen multiple hands in one tourney where two or more players get four of a kind for THE SAME CARD. I mean seriouslyā¦ Seen pocket rockets multiple times in hands in the same tourney. This site just seems a lot less random than most.
2 Likes
We need data not anecdotes.
It is impossible to address your claims, or the claims that anyone else makes, without data.
If you have read this thread, you will see that those people who do care have kept careful records and presented them. Unfortunately for your case, the data presented to date clearly indicate that the algorithm generates hands in line with the mathematical expectation.
My final point is that you and others who claim that the site is rigged in some fashion seem to be unable to explain what gain Replay would get by rigging the game.
Regards,
TA
2 Likes
How exciting 
1 Like
Ok, just for fun, Iāve reviewed a large number of your last games.
Letās just say that I have āsome reservationsā regarding your experience and knowledge. This is not a personal attack as I can say the same thing about most of the people here who complain about a rigged game.
The point that I want to make is that a ācunning strategyā of limping or folding, along with everyone else, and hoping to flop the nuts, the same as the other players, is absolutely guaranteed to let you see card distributions that you might think are unusual. Your opponents, I can assure you, think the same thing: that idiot limped with 94o, missed the flop and still called a min-raise (after 2 others had also called) and then got runner, runner to hit 3 of a kind. The game is rigged, nobody can be that lucky!
If you āletā people play their random rubbish because of your passive betting, not you personally, this applies to everyone, thereās going to be a huge number of things that you think are totally impossible that occur at a surprisingly large frequency.
Having done a small amount of reading regarding probability, Iād be looking for a rigged game if that did not happen. As I have said previously, seeing āimpossibleā events on a fairly regular basis convinces me that all is well in RandomLand. The PRNG (pseudo-random number generator) is behaving exactly as expected.
Thereās a few things that believers in the ārigged gameā hypothesis can do. I would strongly suggest that the believers start by learning some probability theory - specifically, the difference between dependent and independent events. The other thing that I would suggest they do is read up on poker theory.
A very high ranked player, @Yorunoame, put a huge amount of time into writing what can only be called a āMost Excellentā poker tutorial on this very forum.
As good as he is, Yorunoame is not the last word in poker! Thereās many other sites out there. If you think that the advice is a bit strange or doesnāt make sense, feel free to ask in the forum here. You would be amazed how many very, very knowledgeable people will reply to you - that doesnāt include me, by definition (ETA: I may very well reply but you should not think or suspect that I know anything at all about poker compared to the experts)
Finally, as mentioned before, when you have some understanding of probability and how random distributions work, when you have a good grasp of some basic poker theory, when you have some data and when you have a workable hypothesis regarding the gain/loss to Replay of ārunning a rigged gameā then we can have a sensible discussion.
Quite frankly, to all you āReplay is riggedā believers who canāt fulfil those very basic requirements, you may as well try to convince me that you have a pet unicorn who farts rainbows that smell like roses.
Regards,
TA
2 Likes
I have based my claims on my own observations. I believe in them enough to know that anyone else who plays this site and isnāt just out to troll me can see the same thing. Also, there is a PHD player who is saying the same thing. I get it. You saw something online and got triggered. You made no points but rather just attacked me in true triggered fan boy form. Rigged? Never said it was rigged only said that they loosened the algorithm was designed for more dynamic games. The fact that you address other people saying the same thing only stands to prove my point. Itās obvious. You play real poker and then play free site poker with mircro transactions you can see the difference.
Regards (in place of sincerely? Interestingā¦)
Joe Mother
2 Likes
I really donāt know how to reply since you havenāt addressed any of the points that I made. You are indeed attempting to convince me of the existence of your pet unicorn.
I am most certainly not out to troll you or anybody else and I do (very rarely these days) play on this site. I have played a total of nearly 110k hands combining ring games (predominately), SnG and MTT and have not observed anything at all, regarding the algorithm, that has caused me any surprise or concern. I know that we have professional statisticians, engineers and accountants who play here who have also not noticed anything untoward.
is a very easy claim to make but, in this, you would need to indicate that you have an educated idea of the difficulty of implementing such a thing. I did, in one thread or another, attempt to play devils advocate and propose some ways that such a thing could be implemented. I got shot down very quickly!!! Everything that I proposed turned out to have fatal flaws. Some of my ideas were fatally flawed in concept and others were flawed in terms of costs.
Anything other than a truly fair game has additional costs in terms of development effort and actual run-time costs. I donāt think that my ideas were totally unworkable if we assume that Replay has an unlimited budget but, in the real world, there is no such thing and the general idea of a business is to have an income that is greater than the costs of conducting said business.
Ideas that have been explored prior to your contributions here include:
- A āstackedā deck - ie. a deck having more of some cards and less of others
- A target player group - eg. āIf buys chips AND has a pair, deal an extra to give 3 of a kindā
- Mucking around with the actual PRNG - this is a fools errand and ultimately resolves down to one of the previous options
Letās assume that you have the funding to set up your own free chip poker site and you decide, for your own nefarious reasons, that you want to āloosen the algorithmā. Your only source of income is persuading people to actually give you money for chips that you already give away and arenāt worth anything outside of the game.
I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts as to how āloosening the algorithmā would benefit you and what the ālooseā algorithm would look like.
āRegards TAā is my tagline. In British English, āregardsā is a cordial and polite complimentary close that implies neither hostility or (perhaps unwarranted) familiarity. āSincerelyā is generally reserved for formal communications. If I have a personal relationship, I may close with āKind Regardsā and if I am writing to someone with whom I am close, I may choose āYours etc.ā which is making fun of the old English āI am your obedient servantā. I, like most other educated British people, have a variety of closures that I use that carefully reflect the relationship.
Hope this helps,
Regards,
TA
Just to play Devilās advocate, it would not be technically difficult to devise a system that deals a ājuicedā sample of hands.
Instead of using your pRNG to select each card, run it once to generate a number that corresponds to a pre-generated set of shuffles. These could be as weighted towards āactionā shuffles as you thought you could get away with.
Since the way each shuffle plays out contains a lot of player-dependent variables, a relatively small number of shuffles would need to be generated. A million would probably be plenty, and it would be very very hard to detect that they were using such a system.
As for the possible reputation cost of doing this, it would be negligible. I believe they are running a clean game, and look how many people claim itās rigged.
Is this hurting their business? How many of their potential customers have actually read the claims, and how many of those believe it to the extent that they wonāt play here? And if the same things are being said of every online site, whatās the cost?
No, it would be very easy to do. I just donāt see a convincing motive for doing it. What would they gain?
Totally inappropriate hugs that include far too much buttocks fondling,
SPG
3 Likes
Iāve played this site for several years. Itās always the same, river win after river win. Everyone who plays here long enough will figure this out. Most of us will remain here because itās free. Sites nothing but a river winning joke site.
2 Likes
Donāt worry, be happy 
4 Likes
I donāt know why I even bother playing.
aaaaaaaaaa ā¦ added just to avoid the āsimilarity botā ā¦ random rubbish follows at the end
Neither do I!
You have made multiple claims that Replay is rigged.
Given your belief, I can only suggest that you find somewhere else to play.
<<** random rubbish **>>
Regards,
TA
(play hard or go home)
afj g joar ghlllcbngf
Wonāt quit say itās riggedā¦butā¦ Iāve mentioned it before. With most hands it hard to judge, because there ARE alot of combinations that CAN (and WILL alot of the time) beat what you think you should have won with. But the better your hand is, the more specific the way the dealer has to deal to beat you. And Iām saying THAT is exactly what these dealers seem programed to do. Again not saying I always lose when it happens, cause I donāt. Just saying itās pretty fishy EVERY time I catch that once in a blue moon on the flop hand, this site ALWAYS pulls the once in BLUE-ER moon combination that makes something better even possible than what you have, for it.
EVERY single straight Iāve ever hit ON THE FLOP (only counting ones on the flop) has ALWAYS turned/rivered a combination that makes a higher straight or better possible.
EVERY single flush Iāve ever hit ON THE FLOP, has done the same thing except instead of straights its flushes or better. EVERY single one.
EVERY full-house (with pockets in my hand) on the flop, same BS. Turn 90% of time has put a pair on table higher than my pockets. Other 10% turn/river put 3-kind on table.
EVERY full-house (no pockets in hand and non 3-kind on flop) has always turn/river a second pair higher than pair that flopped or put 3-kind on table. Every one.
Iāve only hit QUADS on the flop 8 times total (again only counting those with pockets in handā¦not the 3-kind on the flop type) since Iāve been on this site. Unbelievably Iāve only won with it TWICE!? Lost twice to straight flushes, and 4 times to higher quads!!! The two times I DID win with them, I had pocket Aces, but Turn/River DID put 4 suited sequenced cards on table! BOTH TIMES!
I DONāT get these types of hands enough times for these āFLUKESā to happen EVERY single time, but it is. Is it only happening to me? Nope, I know its not doing that. Is it happening to everybody? Nope, I know itās not doing that either. But whatever it is itās quite selective, NOT random.
I know what Iām NOT winning with, and monster hands on the flop are NOT what Iām winning with.
2 Likes
Sorry but I just canāt hear you over all the yelling uppercase letters. Can you please edit to remove all the unnecessary yelling and I might bother to read your post and possibly care.
p.s. welcome back. lol
1 Like
Tell us how you really feel