3
$\begingroup$

Note: I am fully aware about confirmation bias. People suspected "rigged" dealing in any game that has random elements.

I played on a mobile app of Texas holdem poker called pokerrrr 2. I suspect the game deals non-random hands.

How can I prove the deals are not random?

I prefer a test that can get an answer using just few hundreds of samples since that game engine does not offer the option to export the hands (another red light). Thus I would have to manually record each hand. The deals are really absurd, thus I hope I can prove it with few hundreds of samples.

I thought about a test that only examine either the 5 community cards / only my hands / the winning hand strength (I can record a game with friends where we see each river in order to not miss information).

Another thing that increase my suspicion are the reviews on google-play, for example:

The odds and hands they deal are total fraud. It is 100% obvious that they keep hands close between 2-4 players each hand, with flush, straight, boat, and quad chances ALWAYS present.

Redit:

I have been playing professional since 2008. Played about 3M hands on many pokersites. Didn’t took so long When I realise this is rigged site. I really don’t think there is superuser option, but RNG is super-abnormal. Every hand I won was huge sackout, every hand i lost the same. Just stopped after last session when guy on table lost on AT4 with AA vs. AT (t:T r:T) few hands after one guy set QQ over 55 on Q56, river was : 5. I am just happy that wasn’t experience on my skin but good reason to quit.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ It would be good practice to decide before collecting the data precisely what counts as an absurd deal and then calculate how likely they are to actually appear $\endgroup$
    – Henry
    Apr 6, 2020 at 9:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Implausible results could be made to come about in several different ways. One could stack the deck, arranging cards so that individuals receive pre-chosen hands. But the computer would have to predict the action (stay in, fold) of each player. One could limit the variety of cards that appear--reducing variability would increase the likelihood of straights, trips and so forth, but no flushes necessarily. But it sounds like you suspect that choice of card is dependent on the cards in play. $\endgroup$
    – Ed Rigdon
    Apr 6, 2020 at 12:07
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure what in the deal is not random, like you say, it could be in many ways. From what I observe, the ratio of Huge hands is amateurishly ridicules. currently it is just the opinions of some people. I want to prove it statistically. $\endgroup$
    – Cohensius
    Apr 6, 2020 at 12:30

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

(Speculating.)

As Henry says, you need to first decide what are the implausible events that you want to track. I recommend flushes, because the components of a flush are visually striking and easy to track. To have five cards in suit, with a max of seven cards "in play" for each player, you must either have two cards suited in hand and three cards suited in the community or else four or five cards suited in the community. The latter events are quite striking. The odds of any of these events are easy to compute.

Implausible results could be made to come about in several different ways. One could stack the deck, arranging cards so that individuals receive pre-chosen hands. That is easy in Texas hold'em, since everyone receives two cards, before any decisions are made. Alternatively, one could limit the variety of cards that appear--reducing variability would increase the likelihood of straights, trips and so forth, but not flushes necessarily. A third option, and perhaps the one that you suspect, is that card appearance is dependent on the cards in play.

If you suspect that the deck is stacked for flushes, then you just need to count the frequency of the enabling events and compare it to the odds with a fair deck. But if you think the app is choosing cards in response to player holdings, you might go further and more effectively, by randomizing the decision to stay or fold when suited hands appear. If the app is responding to cards in play, then staying in should increase the odds of cards in that player's suit appearing in the community, while dropping out should reduce the odds (assuming that different players staying in have cards in other suits).

If flushes are unusually common, this should not take long, and if you fail to find evidence, then you can refine your hypothesis.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ O.k, I like your direction, lets assume a a player that see all 7 cards, will get a flush 3.03% of the hands (source: Wikipedia). What is the test that I need to do in order to prove this dealer deals more flushes than the randoms distribution? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_probability $\endgroup$
    – Cohensius
    Apr 6, 2020 at 12:55
  • $\begingroup$ @Cohensius that sounds like a proportion test of $H_0: p=0.0303$ vs $H_a: p>0.0303$. $\endgroup$
    – Dave
    Apr 6, 2020 at 14:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Henry comment: "good practice to decide before collecting the data precisely what counts as an absurd deal". How that translate to the test? Assume I take 100 samples, how many flashes will prove H_a? $\endgroup$
    – Cohensius
    Apr 7, 2020 at 6:41

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.