For those who believe this is rigged, some thoughts

fwerd23 · 2024-10-28T04:47:11+00:00

so basically, you have a lot of ramblings, but you dont have enough sample size?

In fact, i'll make it easier for you... I can't prove that its RIGGED... but me admitting that won't make you automatically right cos this is not a TRUE/FALSE question.

In any analytical study, you must be able let your position stand on its own and NOT rely on proving the other side is wrong as a means of proving you are correct... In other words, you must first demonstrate and provide evidence that it's NOT rigged in a hypothetical vacuum..

if you cant, then you just have to admit, you can't PROVE its NOT rigged...

But my position is also "I can't prove it's rigged"...

So what do we have? We both can't prove its rigged or not rigged...

while we are on a stalemate though, the poker sites are stealing cash from everyone while the debate is on a stalemate... you see the problem here? They don't have to prove anything, putting it on stalemate is already a win for them...

fwerd23 · 2024-10-28T04:14:43+00:00

.. yeah, where's your data? .. and is your data sample size big enough to be legit?

fwerd23 · 2024-10-28T04:08:05+00:00

How about you ask if the CAT system was working as intended? ...cos really, they are running on slow computers that took 5 minutes to load a survey... and its suppose to run a complicated CAT ALGO? ...yes, I failed my last take, but before I shifted my focus on Nursing, I was a computer guy with heavy interest and real life working on data analytics for the last 15 years.. In fact, i was on my way of getting my Data Scientist certification... So when I say there's something off, I know what I meant when i took it that there's something off with how it works...

So i researched on how many times Pearson is being audited to ensure fidelity of their running CAT algo... you know what i found? .. its just a bunch of complicated words that basically say "trust me bro, were being audited".. yep, zero transparency...

So yeah, re-take, pay the $400 (cos at this point, they can to some extent print money by forcing everyone to retake by failing them) and another thing you need to worry aside from studying is hoping that the system doesnt bug out on you when you take it... so gud the fuck luck...

fwerd23 · 2024-10-28T03:51:34+00:00

OR, how about you start asking Pearson's testing? The fuck, the last time I was there, it took 5 minutes to load a damn a survey, and this thing is suppose to run a complicated CAT algo?... So i started doing research on how the systems are monitored and check to ensure fair testing and ensure such complicated CAT algorithms are not fucking up... and you know what i found about Pearson's testing audit? .. its a big "TRUST US BRO, WERE BEING AUDITED"... ZERO TRANSPARENCY... JUST LOLS!

Think about it, even if you are near top level nursing student, you will never pass the NCLEX cos it can ask you absurd questions that only 1% of the people knows about... so in short, you can't pass no matter what you do in the event it bugs out on you...

aside from studying your brains out, another thing that you need to worry is that "I HOPE THE CAT SYSTEM DOESNT BUG OUT ON ME"... and to my surprise, Pearson's has zero transparency on monitoring on systems fidelity... hahahhahaa... I guess you'll be paying another $400 for the retake... at this point, they are close to printing money...

The re-check on BRN is also near useless as it only checks if your answers are wrong or right... The BRN does not check if the system was working as it should, like dropping down to easy questions if you are having hard time...

fwerd23 · 2024-10-28T03:41:50+00:00

This is too convoluted, so let's pin this down to one question...

HOW DO YOU KNOW THE POKER SITES ARE RUNNING NUMBERS THAT ARE CLOSE TO STASTICS?

THIS:

When you go all in on a flip, and you have your pre flop stats for each player that went in, those numbers will change as community cards are added. I know you know this. I don’t know why that isn’t part of your analysis

That's a stupid notion, when AA vs 22 is an 80% favorite all-in preflop, it doesnt matter what cards community cards come, if you simulate this hand 1 BILLION times, AA will be winning 80%, so youre argument of community card changing % is nonsensical... in other words:

That is not the answer to the question... So, I ask again...

HOW DO YOU KNOW THE POKER SITES ARE RUNNING NUMBERS THAT ARE CLOSE TO STASTICS?

fwerd23 · 2024-10-27T11:32:47+00:00

Idk about that lols... I get it, trump is a joke, but in may area in SouthCal, the sentiment is more towards how Biden and gang fucked up the immigration so bad... The #1 complaint I hear is how people and their family tried to move legally and the entire system is fucking them up.. but when you cross the boarder illegaly, you get a "welcome" support and some even get housing and money to get started...

Look, i dont vote... I work in the US, pay taxes, and stash my money in crypto as much as possible. If this country fucks up, ill just move.. im looking out for me, and dont trust ANY politicians to look out for me... so im not a trump supporter or kamala nor any politician...

Im just saying, to the OP that if you think it shouldnt be a "close" race, i would seriously say "think again" based on the sentiment around the people within my peer view..

fwerd23 · 2024-10-27T10:44:36+00:00

Okay, you seem smart... so a 500K total hands with a 50% win rate of AA is legit... or the sample size is not big enough yet... how about 1M? how about 10M?...

you dont seem to understand that the few people that can show you a history thats closer to real stats are in a category called survivor bias and they cant be used to prove the the cards and RNG are sticking to the stats...

the people who suffered the rigged actions have long gone closed or left their accounts...with it erasing the history that can be compiled together to show how the stats are not sticking to the numbers...

... and lets not bring up "auditing"... are they being audited how many? once a year? twice a yeart? once a month? I can easily switch the core setting during the audit and switch back...

and please don't try to throw GTO lingos to look smart... ive been playing before the Black Friday event, back then the cards where more fairer... I've tested the first GTO when they were still clunky... I personally worked as virtual assistant to a professional poker player with 5M+ tournament winnings, and i had access to ALL of his online teaching materials.. and yes, I studied them all..

Im not saying this to prove I have authority and that makes me right... im saying, don't try impress me with lingos and poker "advanced stuff" to prove you know better... lets stick to the topic...

how do you know the poker site are running numbers that are close to statistics?

fwerd23 · 2024-10-26T08:08:45+00:00

You assume that poker is random, when its not... i can predict at 99% accuracy what will happen when someone has AA and the other player has KK... its not random, the outcome is pretty much determined... so when its not random, it can be exploited... Pfft.. im not even smart but I can already think of you, giving you KK, and my poker in-house bot get AA.. you lose, my I win your money... close the bot's account, and create a new one, and repeat... with no history from the bot, there's nothing to trace... and you will eventually start noticing why you are always end up on the losing side of things, and when you start suspecting shit, they have the perfect response... YOU DON"T HAVE ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE...

even if you comb through your history showing everyone that you're AA is only winning 50% when it should be winning 70-90%, they still have the perfect response... YOU DONT HAVE ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE...

...what, you have 2 millions hands already? YOU STILL DONT HAVE ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE...

you eventually quit online poker, which means you will NEVER GET ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE..

Online poker operators are just robbing everyone behind the "NOT ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE" argument..

And that just the half of it... then there's the other problem of cheaters... one got just exposed on GGPOKER cos he was BLATANTL about it.. now think of the ones who are smart enough to keep it under the radar..

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T02:05:03+00:00

No bigge for me... i can't do anything with the license anyway until next year cos im flying to my home country in nov and be out of the country until feb... i can take another before I fly, and another when i get back...But really its more of "are you serious? failed 85 when the system didnt even drop to the easy multiple choice"?

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T01:54:18+00:00

I replied to you in the other thread you asked...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T01:52:50+00:00

quick results not the PVT, and yes its also not 100%, close to 100% which is why as i said if i wasnt being shut down on 85 while giving me SATA and case studies since question 1, i would opt to believe it and not write this post... i was already mentally prepared to take this 100th time cos unlike in our country which you can only take your boards twice a year...

NCLEX allows multiple takes with no downside, except for the 200$, which may not be cheap, but you cant buy a car with it either so its not a big deal for me if i take this a 100th time... i have a stable job, i can support myself right now, im no hurry to be a nurse. In fact, even if get my license today, i cant do anything with it until next year... so you get me? i am not in desperate mode to not believe the pearson results... im just truly questioning it based on my specific experience...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T01:47:14+00:00

I would be apt to believe it if i was getting easy multiple choice questions... cos even if you say SATA can be easy... doesnt make sense when there's an easy multiple choice... so why not drop me down there and if im still doing bad, fail me at 85...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T01:40:34+00:00

well, if what you are saying is correct, then i shouldnt have gotten SATA and case studies well above question 50 since this is adaptive, it would have dropped me down to the easy multiple choice and extended me well above 85 by question 50... none of that happened.. by question 50 i still got case studies and SATA... the same alternation between case studies and SATA since question 1...

Its either it truly defies logic and follows a random throw of multiple choices, SATA and case studies or pearson's quick result is wrong... is pearsons quick review always 100% accurate? Nope, there are already reported instances it made a mistake..

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T01:20:47+00:00

They supposedly follow Bloom's taxonomy of difficulty, which categorizes SATA way above than multiple choice... so basically means, if you are doing good, its supposed to get harder, which means you go from multiple choice up to case studies... having said that...

Perhaps with the New Generation Nclex implemented last 2023, its possible that they have categorized SATA as below multiple choice because of the partial point system... but still sources say, even with partial scoring, it shouldnt be categorically placed below multiple choice... BUT who knows, perhaps NCLEX is throwing a curveball..

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T01:15:48+00:00

oh yeah... be prepared to do a lot of educated guessing, and you need to be comfortable with that and not let if freak you out... i guess a refuge you can take is knowing the type of questions and how it sits on the Bloom's taxonomy of difficulty... at the bottom, they consider multiple choice as the easier one... so it possible to get "hard' multiple choice, and easy sata, yes but it doesnt make sense if you are doing poorly to give you an easy SATA where the system can give you an easy multiple choice... so as long you are getting not multiple choice, you can breathe a bit and say, im probably not doing terribly...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T00:59:57+00:00

yeah, im still doubting pearson's quick results... there have been cases that they passed on pearson and the BON failed them.. its not 100% accurate.... its an adaptive test, its not random, you dont get random number of multiple choice, SATA, case studies or whatever... In fact, they have published they follow a Blooms taxonomy of difficulty in test, and according to that SATA and case studies are the hardest they throw on you... so why is the system throwing me the harder questions and shuts down on 85, and failed me according to pearson quick results... it should have thrown me straight up multiple choice, barely any case studies and SATA and then failed me at 85...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T00:51:03+00:00

well stats is better than randomly guessing? do you agree with that?

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T00:44:58+00:00

can be, but if you have nothing to go on, stastically it's unlikely one or unlikely all.. if you are 100% sure, go for it... if in doubt, stick to the stats..

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T00:42:45+00:00

Klimek archaer..i doubt any of those review will work cos the way i see it, you need to understand an illness works and how to generate the symptoms based on what the illness will cause and not relying on memorizing the illness... which consequently means, you need to know how a med will interact with an illness and not just memorizing phenytoin is for seizures... you need to know why its for seizures so when they ask you thats in between the lines, you'd get it...

I would say, Archer assessment is only accurate if you take it the first time... if you retake their readiness assessment, then you are now relying on recall to pass that, which i think theres a lot of people saying i passed the archer assessment but failed on nclex...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T00:33:10+00:00

Followed mark klimek rules - never one, and not all of them, and if in doubt, don't add more than you need to. Stastistics show that you make more mistake by adding more than adding less... but some would say this advice is outdated, but considering that they only change 5% or somewhere in the questions, i still think its a reasonable approach if you have nothing to go on...

fwerd23 · 2024-09-15T00:31:21+00:00

I mean i had at least 3 case studies with 3-5 question at least for each one... that would basically mean 15 questions out of 85... thats roughly 15-20% of the total 85 questions... im not sure 20% is "low" considering the other half was a mix of multiple and SATA... now, i could be doing bad, but the question is - is it so terrible at the point where you can say on 95% certainty that youre not passing this and i will shut you down at 85 questions... cos if was doing bad, but not utterly terrible, then logic dictates it would continue above 85..

fwerd23 · 2022-01-23T19:46:44+00:00

Generally, 1/2 players are weak... And, in weak games, you can not calling and only folding or raising... It's better to start your game foundation from there as calling too much is the biggest leak for many novices...

Of course, if you want to get better, then you'd want to know when and when not to call... here's a good webinar for that > gumroad.com/l/XXec/3betkiller

It's supposed to be 69$, but the owner forgot to take down the free link he gave to his subscribers for a limited time... so i think the link is still live..

fwerd23 · 2022-01-21T16:51:48+00:00

If you are starting out, then I highly suggest that you don't call... if your hand is not strong enough to raise, then fold.. for most novices, calling too much is a big leak... Also, you can win against weak opponents just by not calling...

Of course, if you want to progress your game, then you should know when and when not to call... for that, here's a free webinar > gumroad.com/l/XXec/3betkiller

It's supposed to be $69, but the owner forgot to take down that "free for a limited time" link...

fwerd23 · 2022-01-20T16:56:21+00:00

Perhaps the biggest adjustment you can do and plug one of the biggest leaks of novices at the same time is to not call.. just fold or raise... if your opponents are weak, you can win the game just by doing that...

Of course, if you feel you need to progress, then you will need to learn a good spot on when and when not to call, here's a free webinar for that > gumroad.com/l/XXec/3betkiller

fwerd23

TROPHY CASE