Paradise Poker...

marine

poker brat
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
3,867
73
48
50
Fort Worth, TX
all depends.

Have you got a 7-8 and all high cards came? fold

have you got 7-8 and the flop was 5-6-A?
might wanna stick in based on the number of people in the pot to pick up your straight.

same thing goes with a flush draw. 2 suited cards in the hole and two more show up on board? might wanna stick around for cheap.
or have A-k and low cards flop? might wanna raise and get it heads up.

all situational.
 

Nolan Dalla

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 7, 2000
1,201
2
0
Washington, DC/Las Vegas, NV
I have been involved in in-depth discussions on this subject and about this site specifically which have dated back more than three years. There is so much I could say on this topic, that's it's difficult to put concisely and down on paper. These are meerly some ramblings, and not my organized thoughts. But they basically sum up my feelilngs about Paradise Poker and other online websites.

1. I have played at six online websites, to date. I believe the security measures on most of them are terribly inadequate. Paradise Poker's lack of security is very troubling, especially when you consider their drop. They are making millions in profits and still are not policing the games to the extent they should. It's one thing for a small start-up online poker room to lack the manpower and software detection system to identify cheaters. It's quite another when the biggest site of them all doesn't seem to take the issue seriously.

2. When I speak of "security," I am talking about two primary (EXTERNAL) threats: 1. Collusion, and 2. Hackers. Collusion CERTAINLY exists (and very little is done about it). I also know hackers have penetrated firealls and can see oppponent's cards (at times). If hackers can crack the NSA's computer, you can be damn sure they can hammer a little contraption like Paradise Poker. The INTERNAL security threat comes from someone working on the inside, which could even be without Paradise Poker's knowledge. This means the entire system is corrupt from the inside, which is a much more serious charge.

3. I believe the site is "hotwired" to distribute higher than average hand values and (for lack of a better phrase) "more bad beats" to the players. By hotwiring the supposedly "random" distrubution of cards, the site generates greater player interest (Hey look Ma! I got four-of-a-kind again!). It also creates a inherent sense of chaos that will make playing online a crapshoot. This is to the site's benefit. What Paradise (or any site) wants is to keep EVERY player they have. By dealing higher hand values and creating more bad beats, this harms the stronger players and helps the weaker players. This prevents the bad players from busting so early and increases the drop.

4. I can give you a list of at least a dozen players, and I am talking top poker pros, who have been destroyed on Paradise Poker. One of these players is a regular $75-150 player who has beaten the game for 30 years. But he can't beat Paradise. It's not an online problem either. He went to two other online sites and is now a prop player for them and DOES manage to beat the games. He's also destroyed the tournaments over at Poker Stars. He's making about $25 an hour between the three sites he plays at. But he could never beat Paradise. Hmmm. Interesting. He's not alone.

5. Players that I have talked to -- and this includes a large number of players who I KNOW are winning players -- complain about an initial rush of cards and good fortune when they first join the site, then it evaporates once you do your first cash out. This is called the old "bait and switch" trick. I believe the software (at least at one time -- when the site was new) was hotwired to let many of the new players win, then once they are hooked, the get ram-rodded up the ass with a series of beats that makes your head spin. Actually, the beats you see are just the NEWER players now get their manufactured "card rush." When I started playing at Paradise three years ago, I ran up my account $3,000 in the first two weeks, then cashed out. Right then and there, I took the most horrendous series of beats and bad luck I have ever had in 20 years of playing. It was scary that this happened to so many other people, as well.

6. I was going to do an investigation of Paradise with two computer programmers. Since I lack the technical expertise personally, I was going to author the report. Two programmers were going to accompany me down to the Carribean and see if the system was on the square. One of these programmers practically invented the early designs of C++. The other programmer designs games for a living. These two associates would easily have been able to identify tampering. So, here's what happened. Initially, I voiced my concerns on RGP and was joined by Ed Hill (a top Las Vegas pro). Paradise offered to bring us both down at their expense to show us the site was on the square. I received invitations to get a tour of the facility. When I recommened they bring down two programmers instead, I never heard back from them. I suspect they though they could pull the wool over my eyes (and they would be right) but when they discovered they might have to deal with technical people who could identify problems with the system, they backed out. All this had nothing to do with non-disclosure. My associates, both in the North Carolina triangle area, were perfectly willing to sign a NDA.

7. It bothers me that this site has NO ONE who is publicly representing or "fronting" the operation. The owner of Paradie Poker is mysteriously unknown. I belive it's important for ALL COMPANIES to have the ownership known publically -- especially a business associated with gambling whihc has an obligation to instill consumer confidence. Unlike the other online poker sites which DO have people in place who are fronting the operation (and who at least would be held accountable) Praadise Poker has NO ONE. Anyone know the CEO at Paradise? No. Anyone know anyone who works there? No. For the biggest poker site to be operating so mysteriously is VERY troubling to me. All of the customer support people use aliases and first names only. This is in contrast to site like Poker Stars who have hired trustworthy people that I know who use their real names and who can be held responsible. Huge red flag. Trouble Trouble.

8. I suspect that Paradise Poker uses bots. Bots are mechanized players, who actually work for the site (they are not real flesh and blood). By having a bot or two in several of the games and hotwiring the distribution of cards, profits at the site could potentially be double over the drop. Again, I can't prove this -- it's just a suspicion. Certainly absolutely with no legal oversight, an online poker operation could deploy bots. Of course, we know that no business -- with absolutely no legal restrictions -- would engage in dishonesty just to make a few more million each yeat, now would they? Naaaaah.

9. I do know some people win at the site. This is not surprising. This is because there are thousands of people playing at the site every day. Not all of them will lose. Despite the problems, there will be a few who will avoid blowing themselves up in the minefield. However, they are not earning nearly as much as they potenitally could if the site was honest. A $30-60 player who plays full time here in Las Vegas can make in the $70K-80 range. In online poker, the pro should make even MORE than that, because there are nearly two times as many hands played per hour. Yet, I am willing to bet there are NO ONLINE PROS making anywhere close to this amount. I believe the topside for an online poker player is probably in the $20-30K range -- based on 40 hours per week. I've not heard of anyone making more than this amount (except for the few who have cashed big in online tournaments -- such as my freinds who together with his tourney wins is making about $25/hour). Sure, the hackers and colluders might make more money than this, but an honest player will have a tough time beating the Paradise game. I've seen too many very talented people go down in flames.

I could write more, but I'm tired. This site smells. Like I said -- stay away.

-- Nolan Dalla
 

acehistr8

Senior Pats Fan
Forum Member
Jun 20, 2002
2,543
5
0
Northern VA
While I hate to disagree with Nolan, I have played here and at Pokerstars for a couple of years and done well at both. Basically people fall into two categories when it comes to online poker 1 - I enjoy it, I do OK, so if its fixed I dont care because the players are bad enough 2 - Its rigged, its a scam. I think its hard to have any in betweens for people who get involved in this discussion. Either way all I can say is caveat emptor. Know what you are getting into, know that collusion is possible.

Now its important to discuss what exactly we mean by collusion. Basically two or more people playing and discussing through AOLIM or other means what hands they have. Does this happen? I am sure that it does. Most sites do try to analyze play and WILL respond if you send them an email with specifics about two people you suspect of colluding. But understand that collusion DOES NOT guarantee those people are going to win. It certainly helps me to know my buddies cards, and it even perhaps will give me a leg up, but it by no means guarantees you will win.

I looked at and read their shuffle algorithim when it was published a while back and he admitted it is as random as you can get when you are talking about computers generating a TRULY random number. That was satisfactory enough for me. Nolan I would like to hear your comments on the PriceWaterhouse report posted here:

.http://www.paradisepoker.com/pwc_review.html

in which they determined that the log files indicated each hand had just as much of a chance of coming up as the next. Im not saying PWC is the end all be all of last words, but I would take their word over a "name" player hired by a site to promote it. If Joe Name hired by Pokerstars tells me they are honest, I am not going to take his word for it. As you could see by the fact that many big names are involved in UltimateBet which by my count has many shady incidents on their record right now (The U2 MLM scam that they have perpetrated as well as the Aruba trip fiasco that went on with many Pro level players, some of whom have since disengaged from UB). My point is, just because a site hires big names does in no way mean they are on the level.

One thing Nolan eludes to is that fact that you tend to win when you sign up, then lose right away. I myself saw quite a few people do this and when I talked to them I came to this conclusion. Online poker is "fun". Its more like a video game. It goes very fast, the colors are "neat" as are the icons and sounds. Online you may get 100+ hands per hour at a table whereas you may get 40 if youre lucky in a B+M room. Online, when beginners first sign up, they tend to play quite tight and play more in line with how they would play in a real poker room. However, as they start to win, they loosen up. Hands fly by unlike in a B+M room, and they are much more likely to lower their starting hand standards online. As they loosen up they tend to, obviously, lose as the losuy hands they play dont hold up. They go on tilt and continue to lose. This happens more times than I can count when it comes to people I know who played online.

I guess the bottom line is no, I do not share the online paranoia that a lot of folks do. I know that people can collude and play with one another and although I feel it is tough to do, at least I go in knowing what I am getting into. Online poker can be a lot of fun if you play within your means and play with your eyes open.
 
Last edited:

Nolan Dalla

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 7, 2000
1,201
2
0
Washington, DC/Las Vegas, NV
Phil made some very good points and I am not going to disagree with them. This is all about two things -- PERCEPTION and SUSPICION. Phil sees the glass half full, and I see it half empty.

I generally tend to be a bit more skeptical about business practices and specifically, gambling enterprises that have no oversight. While Phil is certainly not naive (he knows as much about poker as I do), he obviously tends to me more trsuting towards the proprietors. Fair enough.

However, one thing that is EXTREMELY troubling to me (above all esle) is that the ownship of this outfit is not publically known. It's even worse that no employees are known. Phil -- you and I have a lot of freinds in this industry, and I can identify people we both know at just about every major poker site. Isn't it odd that neither of us knows anyone at Paradise?

When I was going to engage in a report on Paradise (again, this is nearly htree years ago so my information might be dated), I was informed by the Paradise representative that there was not even a full-time programmer ON SITE. Apparently, the programmer (or team) came to the Caribbean every few months, tweeked the wires a bit, and then wnet back home. THIS IS A HUGE ABDICATION OF RESPONSIBILITY! For a site making millions in profits NOT to have a full time progammer on site making sure the operation has not been compromised is astounding. It;s like leaving the bank vault door open and ocming and checking on it every three months. The staffing at Paradise may now include full time technical people ( I don't know) but this all does fall into a VERY TROUBLING pattern of carelessness with regards to security meansures and the VERY REAL threat posed by hackers and colluders. Their attitude -- "ah well, fvck it -- the money keeps rolling in."

On the Price Waterhouse report, I would not be qualified to refute their endorsement of the RNG. But, since they were PAID BY PARADISE to perform an audit, anything they say or write is compromised. Knowing a little as I do about the gaming indsutry, I also believe Price Waterhouse likely sent down programmers who had NO BACKGROUND in game design or online gambling technicalities. So they gave them a pass. Big deal.

At the same time Price Waterhouse was being contracted (interesting that they hired this firm to do supposedly "objective" report at the SAME time all the shiit was hitting the fan with charges of inproprieties -- David Sklansky was trying to get the contract to do the endorsement. Sklansky wanted $100,000 (that's the reported fee, I have no idea if that was the actual number) to put his name on the site as saying it was legitimate. Trouble is -- Sklansky knows no more about computers and programming than I do, yet was willing to endorse something without having run a full bona fide test. This just shows you that the industry has some very disturbing patterns, and it's best to be cautious.

By the way, I totally agree with you about Ultimate Bet. What a fiasco that turned out to be.

-- Nolan Dalla

PS -- I recall the Price Waterhouse report was shot full of holes by some programmers at RGP (Jeff Woods, Chris Hartman and others). The critics bascially stated the PW report didn't know what it was talking about, as the test runs and methodology used was so faulty. If I can find the critical rebuttle of the PW report (came out well over two years ago), I'll post a link to it.
 

acehistr8

Senior Pats Fan
Forum Member
Jun 20, 2002
2,543
5
0
Northern VA
Nolan, real good to see you back on here.

I agree that Paradise has many qualities about it I would change, though these arent an indication of what I think of online poker in general.

I think its absurd they have no programmer onsite, in fact, I would be interested to hear if this is still the case. I would think, (think) they would go out of their way to prove they are on the up and up, which is why I find this troubling indeed. And yes I think it is odd they have no name players signed up with them. Seemingly 80% or so, OK that number might be high, but a large proportion of Joe Names are now "in" with one site or another. The fact that Paradise stays out of the fray could be an indication that hey they are so big they dont need further promotion, or in fact it could be something else. I agree, I would welcome them opening their doors to someone, myself included to get in their and scope out their operations.

I believe Jeff Woods wrote the post you are referring to, one of the things they noted is that PWC was provided a hand log file by PP, which you could argue, could be manipulated by PP before being sent off. I obviously have no knowledge of anything like that, but certainly its possible.

Cant wait to read the book. Forgot to mention, Goldie mentioned you before the NLHE tournament Saturday, you were applauded and soundly missed. I may be in LV next weekend, are you playing any poker these days?

- Phil
 

TheShrimp

Registered User
Forum Member
Jan 15, 2002
1,138
0
0
53
I don't find it troubling at all that there are no programmers on site. Someone wrote software for paradise poker, sold them the software and provides occasional support. I can't think of many areas where programmers are with clients full-time to support their software. The point is to get it right before it goes out of house and make tweaks as the client sees fit.

Don't confuse programmers with network support either. I'm sure they have guys there that keep the network up but they're not programmers.

Nolan -- it shouldn't be surprising at all that they wouldn't let you bring programmers down with you. As a player I would be very concerned about that, regardless of your reputation.

Respectfully, I think there are holes in every one of Nolans points, except #7. They've all been hashed to death at sites like RGP and I guess it's just a matter of what side you come down on after reading it all.

Hellah -- the question of "whether you should stay in if you don't have anything on the flop." The easy answer is no, but not having anything might mean not having ANYTHING. No straight draws, no overcards, no flush draws, no bluffing opportunities, nothing, and it always has to be weighed against what the bet is to you and how much is in the pot. Pick up a good beginning book like Lee Jones' "Winning Low Limit Hold 'Em".
 

Penguinfan

Thread banned
Forum Member
Dec 5, 2001
10,393
190
0
Vanished into vortex
Shrimp, I want to be very clear here and refer to my earlier post that said I had no proof of any wrong doing going on, maybe I didn't stress that enough, however people have raised the points Nolan brings up over and over again about Paradise. You don't hear these complaints about other sites though, at least not nearly as much. I would like to hear how this things could be proved easily as you say. I think they would be very difficult to prove from this side of the screen, again thats my opinion. If you play there and do well then by all means have at it. You may list me in the camp of those who find Paradise very questionable and because of that I will play elsewhere.

Penguinfan
 

ndnfan

certified
Forum Member
Mar 4, 2001
2,364
0
0
54
Ohio
Very interesting thread to say the least. Thanks to everyone on their comments and opinions....good stuff that gets you thinking.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top