Message Board : Musing about online dealing and randomness

No, this is not a rant about online poker being rigged for action flops or to reward weak players to keep them playing and putting money into the site, or to increase pot sizes and rakes.   It's irritating to me every time a suckout is blamed on “this site”.  The natural randomness and luck factor in any poker game is exactly the same online and live. 

Or is it?

The top two online sites use two totally different ways to deal the cards:

1. PokerStars creates a random deck of 52 cards before each hand, and that deck is fixed for the duration of the hand and dealt pretty much the same way as a physical deck would be dealt in a live game.  It is an accurate simulation of live dealing.
2. FullTilt uses a continuous shuffle, where the remaining deck is reshuffled after every round of betting and before dealing the next street.  One stated reason is that this prevents cheating by insiders who could have access to know the next card to be dealt.  That possibility is eliminated since the next card can't be known until betting is completed.

The FullTilt method means that when you fold your hand and then the flop comes to make a full house from your cards, it is an illusion.  Had you stayed in and bet, the flop would have been totally different. Knowing this can make it easier for you to ignore it and not be bothered, knowing you would not have flopped that monster.  But it is also somewhat unsettling to know that your every action and timing changes the outcome.   There is something unnatural about it.

Although no argument can be made that this isn't truly random, and over time it will result in exactly the same distribution of hands and flops as a perfectly shuffled physical deal at a live table, this bothers me.  It is NOT a true simulation of a live game, even if we accept that the outcome is the same.

Mathematically it can be proven that the two methods of dealing will produce the same set of outcomes over time.  But do we truly know that this is case?  Do humans understand randomness and probability well enough to make this leap of faith that two completely different methods of shuffling and dealing cards truly result in exactly the same game being played?  I wonder about this. 

The fact that on FullTilt any player can change the next card by taking longer, betting differently or by doing anything differently, bothers me.  Yes It's truly random, but it is randomness influenced in a way that does not exist in a live poker game.  Of course a perfect shuffle probably doesn't happen every time in a live game, but at least you know that once the shuffle is done, the cards to come are set in stone.  Whatever card is at your position in the deck is the one you are going to get.

I don't know why, but the PokerStars method is comforting to me.  The FullTilt method bothers me.  Not bothers me in that I won't play there, it is my favorite site.  But bothers me in the back of my mind and makes me wonder about whether it is truly the same game being played there, exactly and precisely, or is it slightly out of kilter with the universe in some miniscule way?

Honestly, I prefer the FT style as well, though I play mosty at Stars.  Many procedures used in live games are a compromise between fairness and time.  If there were enough time and it didn't slow the game, I'd like live dealers to continuously shuffle. 

Back in the day, in the old road games, I understand that you could ask for a cut at any point in the hand.  So, it just isn't that out line to continuously shuffle.  It used to be possible to add randomness in during the hand when cheating was more of a problem.

spadebidder said:

The FullTilt method means that when you fold your hand and then the flop comes to make a full house from your cards, it is an illusion.  Had you stayed in and bet, the flop would have been totally different. Knowing this can make it easier for you to ignore it and not be bothered, knowing you would not have flopped that monster.

I hope you know that this thinking gets you into trouble: A good decision to fold remains a good decision even if the lucky card comes lateron in the hand.

People in my home game want to know which cards would have come all the time. To me it doesn't matter. If the odds are against me and the price too high then the correct decision is to fold (or bluff, maybe). If you judge your decision by the outcome you'll start making bad calls over and over again (as the guys in my home game do…). Protect yourself from that leak and evaluate your decision based on what you knew AT THE TIME you made the decision!

Greyzy

Two cents worth:

I cannot stand the idea that the cards are randomized after each card is dealt.  Or after the flop, turn and river.  I don't care if it really is randomized; it just doesn't seem like the same game.

And I am not interested in “what might have been.”  I just would like to know that the cards are “what they would have been.”  Just like with a live dealer.

The only place I play is FullTilt.  I am probably not changing sites over this, but I surely don't like it.

Natchez

P.S. Spadebidder, I was truly impressed by your discourse in another post about percentages of drawing various hands.  You are playing “deeper” than I imagined. 

Ah, yes grasshopper, but did you grasp the true meaning of the emptiness, or did you think it was a mere accidental slip of the keyboard?