|
I am pretty new to poker (online or otherwise) so I understand that my comments probably won't carry much weight. I found this page when I started doing some searching because I was becoming so disillusioned with poker in general after playing on FTP.
To me, it seems that there are plenty of advantages to orchestrating the outcome of hands. The biggest of these being that the goal of the site is mass traffic - not a small group of elite players competing with one another.
Imagine two individuals become interested in poker and begin playing on FTP. Bob is in marketing, is a people person, and has always been told he is "lucky". He sees a heads-up tournament and thinks he could have some fun and probably get lucky and maybe even rich and famous at that. Joe is in accounting, is a numbers person, and likes odds and puzzles. He thinks that, with an understanding of the underlying fundamentals and odds, he could probably make a little money every now and then in addition to the enjoyment of playing the odds.
Both are in a tournament on FTP. Bob is dealt K4s and Joe is dealt AA. Bob knows nothing about the strength of his hand or odds and is out-of-position but thinks he remembers his favorite pro shoving all-in last weekend with K4s. Joe is in late position and knows Bob has been playing every hand he gets so he calls all-in. Both players show their cards.
Now, let's follow two different scenarios. In the first, the flop comes 39J rainbow, the turn comes 4h, and the rivers comes Qs. Joe is rewarded for his research and patience and wins with AA. Joe continues to play the same way and increases his skill. Bob is disappointed and assumes it is just bad luck. He catches a break everyone once in a while, but just continues to lose and ultimately gets bored. He think that he's just not lucky.
In the second scenario, the flop immediately comes KK2 giving Bob three of a kind, the turn comes Js, and (to add insult to injury) the river comes 4d. Bob wins with his miraculous full house, congratulates himself on his luck, can brag about his "great hand" to his coworkers, and keeps playing the same way. Joe is crushed, but knows he made the right call. He knows that if he plays enough, he SHOULD come out ahead as long as he plays the right way.
I can guarantee you that there will be far more Bobs than Joes. So, clearly, it would be in the best interest of FTP to artificially keep the Bobs winning against ridiculous odds. If Bob loses, he won't think that he should research his odds and play more carefully - he'll just quit. When Joe loses, he'll continue playing knowing that the odds SHOULD be in his favor.
I'm no statistics guru, but it seems to me that the argument that more bad players equates to more bad beats doesn't make sense. I would think that more bad players should mean more reward for those who play correctly. That never seems to be the case, though.
|