Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pton_xd 405 days ago
Wouldn't that show up in a statistical analysis of the community cards? How is your algorithm modifying the community cards advantageously but preserving randomness such that over a large sample size every card shows up at the same frequency? Although it wouldn't be exactly the same, presumably some cards that are less often bet preflop, like a 2, would show up at a slightly higher frequency in the community cards, but still.

The much simpler way to cheat is to just give some players more information. Or, run bots that take up guaranteed payout seats in tournaments and such, which I've heard rumors of happening on certain sites. Or both.
2 comments
sejje 404 days ago
Yes, statistical analysis would reveal unfair deals of any variety.

And yes, both the types of cheating you've mentioned have happened.

Some players getting more information is called "superusing" -- see Absolute Poker scandal.

Empty seats being filled with bots in tournaments with a guarantee -- ACR

link
_heimdall 405 days ago
Fake players or predefining winners would work as well.

My point was simply that an online casino could seem completely legit even if you can compile audit logs of every players' hands at the table. Controlling the community cards is completely undetectable and more than enough to push larger pots, and therefore larger rakes.

link
sejje 404 days ago
It's not undetectable.

Most pots already hit maximum rake.

link
_heimdall 404 days ago
How would one detect it?

As far as I'm aware, you would have to know the full list of cards in the shuffled deck before the hand was played to know they didn't change the community cards.

link
sejje 404 days ago
Because it shows up in analysis of millions of hands.

The community cards are subject to the same frequencies as the hole cards.

(And you can see them more often, so they're actually easier to analyze)

link