ONLINE POKER IS 100% RIGGED

[stockman]

Before you lose your whole roll playing online poker I just wanted to tell you to stick to live game play. Online poker is rigged 100% & if you continue to play you will lose all of your money. I am a professinal poker player trying to get the word out. I make a living playing live games & consistently dominate these games. After losing constantly online I decided to do some studies & research these randomness of the cards & came to the 100% conclusion that they are set against you. I have several friends that play professionally & know many more that do & have never known anyone that could beat the online game consistently. If youre winning now its only because the site has you in win mode & soon you will hit distribution mode. New accounts & poorer players are givin better flops to keep tables full so the sharks wont take all their money, this keeps tables full & rake up. They also have site shills that play for site to take your roll. I learned the hard way. I hope to spread the word. These sites are mafia run & locate offshores so they are not regulated. Oh & ive heard all the #$%^ about why they wouldnt rig because its not in their interest. These are nieve gullables or paid site shills. The rake is no competition for taking your whole bankroll. Those who dont believe in conspiracy are fair game for those who conspire. The @#%% with the illuminati & all those work for them.
Back to top

[Matt Jenko]

funny guy. show me your 100% proof and i will believe you if it holds up. Until then, calm down and stop being so melodramatic.

[Bulbarainey]

if you suck, you suck. i have a few friends who cant beat online but do win live, and its because live players suck more in general, at least in the LA area.... the only site i would even consider possibly rigged is pacific... a friend of mine turned his last $3 into $3600, getting a lot of crazy hands... and i think it was more likely a coincidence

[Cleveland Guy]

Jackpot Jay - is that you?

[tylerdurden]

Well, I'm convinced! Case Closed!!

[RayGarlington]

[ QUOTE ]
If youre winning now its only because the site has you in win mode & soon you will hit distribution mode.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I feel myself slipping into distribution mode, I set up a new account and get back into win mode.

[sirtimo]

[ QUOTE ]
nieve gullables

[/ QUOTE ]

Dont they have a new album coming out soon?

[Guthrie]

Thanks for sharing.

[Dunno]

Well i dont really belive u but plz show us some proof for ur claims. I really think that u and ur friends maybe just have a long loosing streak or u just cant beat the agressive onlinegames. in time u will learn.
Do like i do when im loosing money. GET DRUNK and be back playing the next day /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Al Schoonmaker]

Since several of my friends make a nice living playing online, I have extreme doubts about your conclusion.

I think you are rationalizing because you don't win online. There are a large number of reasons that winning B&M players don't win online. Some of them are discussed in my article on "Paranoia." You can read it at cardplayer.com.

I am sure there are others that I have not considered.

But the conclusion that online is 100% rigger is not justified without VERY SOLID evidence, and you have not presented ANY evidence.

Al

[Poker Cat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nieve gullables

[/ QUOTE ]

Dont they have a new album coming out soon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Think he was talking about the actress, Nieve Campbell.

[Poker Cat]

[ QUOTE ]
The @#%% with the illuminati & all those work for them.
Back to top

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this tells you everything you need to know about this poster (Trilateral Commission, anyone?). My bet? Hoax.

But while we're on the subject . . .
One important difference between B&M & online cardrooms is that every single hand played online is PUBLIC. All those millions of hands (or is it billions, Carl?) can be downloaded into databases and analyzed 9 ways to Sunday.
A quick check of this site shows there are quite a number of datageeks doing just that all the time.

Do you think maybe, if a major site were rigged, somebody would have noticed by now? Do you think they might like to get on Primetime Live with their findings with an hour-long special? How about someone working for a competing site? Mightn't they have a rooting interest?

Like the Amazing Randi, waiting by the phone for someone to take him up on his decades-old $1 million offer to anyone who could present proof of the existence of ESP, we're all still waiting.

[The Dude]

Al, you're a better man than me. I'm just not able to respond to that post without making fun of the poster.

[warlockjd]

[ QUOTE ]
Some of them are discussed in my article on "Paranoia."

[/ QUOTE ]

[naphand]

This poster is wrong, and so are you about Randi. James Randi is an idiot, several people have offered to take him on over the so-called offer for ESP but he has the habit of setting impossible-to-meet conditions (so I have heard). If you want proof of the existence of ESP speak to the Military regarding their "remote viewing" experiments (both in the USA and Soviet Union) or maybe just take a look at the results produced by the internationally respected PEAR Lab. at Princeton University (Princeton Engineering Anonmalies Research Laboratory). They have a website and some of the research and background is published in their book "Margins of Reality".

It is not a question of whether ESP exists or not, it exists and demonstrably so. The problem is (i) providing some kind of mechanism to explain it, which is necessary for any theory to have credence and (ii) finding out the practical uses and limitations.

Those who belong to the "there is no evidence" are basically the same as Randi "we refuse to listen, we refuse to see, so we refute (as we have neither seen or heard)". There is a huge and growing body of credible evidence if you would only bother to look (which you clearly have not). Sure there are any number of crackpots, but there are also a growing number of respected physicists and psychologist, surgeons etc. that now accept its existence both from experimental data and the substantial quantity of anecdotal and experiential evidence. If you refuse to believe it, you are a fool, the evidence is overwhelming. Oh well, I hope your flat-earth membership goes though ok...

[propervillain]

I have proof of ESP. Here it is: this thread will continue much longer than is necessary.

[ghostface]

The first problem with your argument is you say that there are sharks. If the cards are rigged then there can be no sharks to take your money. Only the casino takes your money. And the rake is much greater than your roll to them. If you had pokertracker and analyzed your rake vs winnings after a while at a low to mid limit you would see that while you may make a killing on your pley, the casino still makes more.

If the games arent beatable, why for two years have I won more than 500 a month playing in my spare time.

[TomCollins]

Someone listens to Art Bell too much. Are there Shadow People too?

[toots]

Beat into submission by the thump-thump-thump sound of them black helicopters, no doubt.

[Easy E]

You belong in the Zoo. Begone, parasite.

I've heard all the money made by NASA selling photo-rights for the faked Apollo moon missions is being used to set-up poker sites with the sole purpose of funding another fake mission to Mars. Of course this is only idle hearsay and I'd be very happy to see some EVIDENCE.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
This poster is wrong, and so are you about Randi. James Randi is an idiot, several people have offered to take him on over the so-called offer for ESP but he has the habit of setting impossible-to-meet conditions (so I have heard). If you want proof of the existence of ESP speak to the Military regarding their "remote viewing" experiments (both in the USA and Soviet Union) or maybe just take a look at the results produced by the internationally respected PEAR Lab. at Princeton University (Princeton Engineering Anonmalies Research Laboratory). They have a website and some of the research and background is published in their book "Margins of Reality".

It is not a question of whether ESP exists or not, it exists and demonstrably so. The problem is (i) providing some kind of mechanism to explain it, which is necessary for any theory to have credence and (ii) finding out the practical uses and limitations.

Those who belong to the "there is no evidence" are basically the same as Randi "we refuse to listen, we refuse to see, so we refute (as we have neither seen or heard)". There is a huge and growing body of credible evidence if you would only bother to look (which you clearly have not). Sure there are any number of crackpots, but there are also a growing number of respected physicists and psychologist, surgeons etc. that now accept its existence both from experimental data and the substantial quantity of anecdotal and experiential evidence. If you refuse to believe it, you are a fool, the evidence is overwhelming. Oh well, I hope your flat-earth membership goes though ok...

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong my friend - I know James Randi and he is a genius. It is always the frauds and fakers who claim his testing methods are unfair - because it prevents them from cheating. His methods are extremely fair and scientific.

As to your claim of internationally respected PEAR Lab. at Princeton University (Princeton Engineering Anonmalies Research Laboratory). I did a google on it and not one reference came up. How respected is it you Bozo????

[Waloonga]

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the link. However, are you aware of any respected scientific organizations who have commented on their work or duplicated any of their claims in another lab?

[ERHutchison]

I, too, know Randi and can vouch for the fact that his offer is legitimate. Alas, the claimants aren't.

As a former psychology professor and the author of a book on the subject, I have spent much time researching the issue of ESP and psychic claims.

I know of many people who claim that ESP is a demonstrable fact. Unfortunately, I know of no one who has ever demonstrated it.

It is possible, I suppose, that psi forces may exist in some non-utilitarian fashion. Of course, that has never been proven, but, who knows...

What we see on the stage, however, is never psychic, it is always magic. If ESP exists it certainly does not exist in any way that would permit some performer to call upon it at show time. Kreskin, John Edwards, Uri Geller, and their ilk are, of course, magicians.

[StellarWind]

Funny how everyone jumps on such an obvious provocation/hoax.

But it is worth remembering that there is a big difference between "online poker is generally legitimate" and "every online poker site is legitimate". Human greed and folly being what it is, the day will surely come when some online poker room is caught rigging the RNG for fraudulent purposes.

Not to name any names, but I might think twice about a site that 1) clearly seems to think winning players are a business liability and 2) makes it difficult or impossible to assemble a statistically significant number of hand histories, thereby preventing any meaningful analysis from being done. If someone were corrupt that's exactly what I would expect to see.

[Al Schoonmaker]

Would you provide the website address, please?

Thank you.

Regards,

Al

[Al Schoonmaker]

A moment ago I asked him for the website address. I am one of the people who says, "There is no evidence."

If he or they have evidence, I want to see it.

Until I see it, I will repeat my earlier position, "ESP is nonsense."

If I see scientifically credible evidence, I will gladly change my mind, but the burden of proof is unquestionably on those who claim that ESP exists.

As for the point about "impossible to meet conditions," I know almost nothing about Randi, nor do I take him seriously. I do know that many people without training in the sciences regard STANDARD scientific controls such as large, representative samples and double blinds as "impossible to meet." But every competent scientist knows that these conditions exist for a reason: To prevent "Voodoo science" from influencing people's decisions.

The book by that title is well worth reading. It briefly mentions ESP, but spends a lot of time on other scientific frauds such as cold fusion and various other "solutions" to our energy problems.

Regards,

Al

[Maddog121]

The main problem with this post is the complete absence of any UN involvement reference. This leads me to believe the poster is just part of the whole New World Order conspiracy using the Illumanati as their favorite smokescreen. This concentrates the public's focus on the banking industry and away from the global-political power structure using online poker to subsidize terrorist actions such as the Oklahoma City, the attempted assassination of Randy Weaver, the successful assassinations of Lincoln, the Kennedys, and the sinking of the Titanic (by a nascent UN's (not outwardly known) black submarine). Ladies and Gentleman BEWARE!

[GeniusToad]

The stubborn skeptic wants more than anything to be correct. His search for "truth" will always be insincere because its not truth he searches for, but self-confirmation. His ego is his greatest undoing. It is those that defy skepticism with an almost blind faith that will make true progress toward truth. A hint of skepticism can keep one grounded in reality but lack of open-mindedness can keep one from ever discovering truth.

That being said, the original post is nonsense and should be ignored. Focus, instead, on the interesting questions that have been raised by repliers. Some good stuff can be gleaned from this thread.

[faustusmedea]

Here's the thing.

When someone posts such as the thread starter, they might just as well be planted by someone seeking to hide impropriety because the responses are pretty easily predicted.

The problem is; most big time financial folks understand the concept of shearing sheep as well as the power of large numbers of small transactions. Once big money comes along in any endeavor, there will be computer simulations put together to determine methods for increasing the numbers.

I recall a story about vegas casinos a while back. The idea was to create viable defenses against card counters. One study was prepared that suggested if multiple decks were put into the shoe at the beginning of the day with the cards configured AthruK KthruA AthruK KthruA, the resulting clumping of big card/small card groups would persist through many shuffles. Now, I don't know if its true, but I do know that that is how a standard deck of Kem cards comes now. I also know that the casinos no longer pay out 5 card charlies which theoretically would not be more prevalent in a multiple deck situation.

For the online poker rooms, I am certain with the data they have, they can easily determine the percentages of winners/losers at each level. Further, they can easily shape the data to determine if weak players are being chased too quickly.

So, my question is: Why wouldn't an online cardroom find algorithms that throw exceedingly small disadvantages at better players from time to time in order to prolong both their play as well as the fish in the tank.

For my part, I am up significantly online. Most of this has come from a number of large tourney cashes. In the 15/30 Party game, I am up slightly after 50k hands. Recently in vegas, I was playing with math guy; Paul Magriel and he scoffed at the notion of 25k hands not being enough to determine whether you are a winning player, yet all you need to do is troll the High limit forum and you see horror stories galore of 3-400BB downswings with variance being the biggest challenge to long term success.

The additional component to this is the pro player typically runs a minimum of 3 tables and a lot of folks are doing many more than that. This creates an effect where a lot of raked hands are generated, but it absolutely HAS to put real pressure on the fishing. With the current upsurge in popularity, there is obviously a greater influx and an evergrowing pool of players, but it isn't infinite and somebody looking to; say take a gaming site public would want to grow numbers incrementally and keep them growing quarter over quarter.

Now, to dispute the above, you might say look at the hand histories. And sure enough, over 50k hands I have a near perfect distribution of starting hands. But imagine a sophisticated shuffle that could distribute premium holdings with a slightly unfavorable position. Again, don't think "All AA would be given to the player UTG". Think more that AA is dealt on average the same amount in any position, then you skew the shuffle slightly to MP and early position over a small number of these hands. A computer simulation could easily show the winning percentage changes based on such movement. And because we aren't talking big changes, it probably would not look suspicious unless you could compare multiple player databases; something not likely to occur ;-) Remember, this is all taking place on essentially large database software so creating such models would be trivially easy. There is an interesting thread in the high limit forum about a guy with what are essentially losing player stats, yet he has crushed the game over a huge number of hands. Is he the one in a million?

In reality, Rake back programs may simply be the wink from the company to professional player as to what is occurring. They don't really want to kill the pro, they simply want to manage the resource much as your local Fish and Game department does.

Bottom line; things are seldom as they appear on this planet and if there is an extra dollar to be raked, online poker sites, drug and oil companies or nations will find a way to do so. I have also posted about more sophisticated collusion issues that also fight the general consensus.

Time to go make up some new tinfoil hats for the rest of the week's play. Good luck.

[Zeno]

Randi is a debunker, in the same mold as Houdini was a debunker of mediums in the 1920's. A magician that exposes frauds that use magic tricks to promote so called psychic powers to bilk people out of money etc. He is not a formal scientist, but he is useful in that he has exposed many frauds and quacks. He is associated with an organization called CSICOP that publishes The Skeptical Inquirer. A useful magazine, if not very well known.

They have a website: CSICOP (http://www.csicop.org/)

-Zeno

I think you are right. If I stop playing for a week or so, I suddenly get great hands for the first few times I return.I wonder if others have noticed this.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
Randi is a debunker, in the same mold as Houdini was a debunker of mediums in the 1920's. A magician that exposes frauds that use magic tricks to promote so called psychic powers to bilk people out of money etc. He is not a formal scientist, but he is useful in that he has exposed many frauds and quacks. He is associated with an organization called CSICOP that publishes The Skeptical Inquirer. A useful magazine, if not very well known.
-Zeno

[/ QUOTE ]
They have a website: CSICOP (http://www.csicop.org/)

Some of the founding members of CSICOP included scientists, academics, and science writers such as Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov, Philip Klass, Paul Kurtz, Ray Hyman, James Randi, Martin Gardner, Sidney Hook, and others. A list of CSICOP fellows is published in every issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine.

You might also try this link - http://www.randi.org/

[The Mang]

Which online rooms are you talking about specifically?

As in any industry, I am sure there are some online poker rooms that don't play entirely by the rules in the name of making a higher short-term profit.

The odds of foul-play increase when you take into account the amazing number of online rooms, and that the industry has been able to position itself to be relatively free from regulation.

[LoveMyAces]

Great post faustusmedia. Finally some brains in one of these posts. I became suspicious a while back when it seemed the cards could be good for awhile and suddenly bad. More swings than any I have seen in a live game. The thing is if you try to find out how the RNG is tested and verified while in use and safegaurded from tampering you can find out nothing. I have emailed BMM, Iglobal, and other verification sites and not one returned my email. If they are completely honest and using great methods to insure that the deals are honest why is it you get smoke and mirrors when you try to find out the methods? If you go to the web sites of these verification firms you get a run around. At the Poker web sites where you play you get a hazy picture and run around. If this is being done fairly and honestly why not show the exact method of testing, verification, and tamper proofing of the RNG in live use play? They should be screaming this from the roof. It should be in every banner add and a complete page dedicated to it on the sites where you play. Why don't they want the us to know? Has anyone else tried to dig out this information?

[SpearsBritney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If youre winning now its only because the site has you in win mode & soon you will hit distribution mode.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I feel myself slipping into distribution mode, I set up a new account and get back into win mode.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

[ianlippert]

First let me say that I have been a winning player at the lower limits for the past 30K hands. I have basically grinded my way from .01/.02 to 1/2. I just hit my first 150BB losing streak and it seems like there is no end in sight.

I have to say that the idea that the sites rig the dealing is absolutely rediculous. For several reasons:

First of all there arent that many sharks. According to another post I read a while back, only about 10-15% of the players in any player pool are long time winners. The rest of the pool consists of fish that exchange their money back and forth while the sites eat them up with the rake.

Second of all the sharks arent actually taking that much money from the fish. Lets assume that out of 100 players 15 are averaging 1BB/hr for 15BB/hr from the fish. That is a cost of about .175BB/hr charged to each fish. At 1/2 this means that the average fish will get 285 hrs of play out $100. I see no reason why the card site would risk the millions of dollars they are making just to increase this to 300+hr/$100. How much more can they possibly make? There are ppl tracking a rediculous amount of hands, a site will get discovered.

Third, they dont need to do anything to ensure that the fish stick around. People love to gamble! I dont understand it much, but ppl love to play craps/roulette/lottos and will gladly throw their money away, and then come back and do it again!

what the conspiray theorists fail to realise is that its not the sites that are rigged, its the game. Texas holdem probably has the highest amount of luck involved out of any form of poker (from what I've read at least, I dont play anything else). It also has a very high degree of skill, its pure brilliance. Why do you think its the most popular form of poker? It keeps the fish around. Love it for what it is /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[dark_avenger]

I make shittons of money playing online.

I do not know any mafia members or am connected to them in any way.

rake from 1000's of people >> taking one person's bankroll and giving it to a shill and then getting caught and going out of business

maybe you just suck

posts like this make me laugh at the stupidity of some people, it's sad to see that they're making their way into 2+2 however.

oh yeah, and your friends suck too.

just cuz you can beat the 3-6 or 5-10 at commerce or whatever fish pond you play at doesn't mean you're a good player who can play the same limits online and make money.

wanna play heads up sometime?

go read a f-ing book, learn some math, and then come back and post something meaningfull

[Card08]

Yeah, this genius is signing up for accounts on forums all over the net and putting up the exact same bullxxxx post. see

http://www.pokerforums.org/showthread.php?t=3246
"stockman27
Fish Food Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2


ONLINE POKER IS RIGGED

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before you lose your whole roll playing online poker I just wanted to tell you to stick to live game play. Online poker is rigged 100% & if you continue to play you will lose all of your money. I am a professinal poker player trying to get the word out. I make a living playing live games & consistently dominate these games. After losing constantly online I decided to do some studies & research these randomness of the cards & came to the 100% conclusion that they are set against you. I have several friends that play professionally & know many more that do & have never known anyone that could beat the online game consistently. If youre winning now its only because the site has you in win mode & soon you will hit distribution mode. New accounts & poorer players are givin better flops to keep tables full so the sharks wont take all their money, this keeps tables full & rake up. They also have site shills that play for site to take your roll. I learned the hard way. I hope to spread the word. These sites are mafia run & locate offshores so they are not regulated. Oh & ive heard all the #$%^ about why they wouldnt rig because its not in their interest. These are nieve gullables or paid site shills. The rake is no competition for taking your whole bankroll. Those who dont believe in conspiracy are fair game for those who conspire. The @#%% with the illuminati & all those work for them.
Back to top

Don't act like a nieve gullable; ignore this guy.

[propervillain]

[ QUOTE ]
I have proof of ESP. Here it is: this thread will continue much longer than is necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tah dah!

[Master5hake]

sorry if I'm just missing the article you mentioned in your post, but I was interested in reading your paranoia article, but don't see it listed among your columns on cardplayer.com

http://cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/writers/view/name/Alan_Schoonmaker


I have enjoyed many of the other articles I found there however! and your book The Psychology of Poker was one of the first poker books I read and it remains one of my favorites -

If you could point me to your article it would be much appreciated -

Thanks!

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to name any names, but I might think twice about a site that 1) clearly seems to think winning players are a business liability and 2) makes it difficult or impossible to assemble a statistically significant number of hand histories, thereby preventing any meaningful analysis from being done. If someone were corrupt that's exactly what I would expect to see.


[/ QUOTE ]

So I guess that's 2 implications against Pacific in the same thread. Strange. I don't see how the same people who dismiss anyone even suggesting that online poker is rigged can cast aspersions on a site twice in 1 thread.

Don't the same arguments used to defend the integrity of online games from a business standpoint apply to Pacific as well?

Also, I believe that a patch recently came out from PT that allows players to grab their hand histories from Pacific and store them.

[Al Schoonmaker]

My mistake. That article was published in "Poker Digest," which is now out of business.

I've sent a copy to you in a PM.

Regards,

Al

[ihardlyknowher]

[ QUOTE ]
finding out the practical uses

[/ QUOTE ]

for ESP??? Here's one: playing poker and using your clairvoyance to determine (1) your opponents hole cards and (2) the board cards yet to come.

Wait, it all makes sense now, the only successful online poker players have this power and are using it against the rest of us, but they keep it under wraps because they are making so much $$. I am never playing online again. What was the name of that article again, "Paranoia"?

[paulnortonyoung]

Al,

I'd be very interested to read the article too, if you don't mind.

Thanks,

Paul

[stockman]

Well guess Im exposed, Im signing up at other poker forums & posting the same thing. (Thats exactly my point). Im trying to get the word out. I'll also be wearing a pokerconduct.com T-shirt at the wsop main event in Las vegas that says Time to take a stand. These poker sites will eventually be exposed for what they are, Im just trying to speed up the process. If you keep playing online poker, you will eventually lose all your money. Its not just one or two sites, Its all of them. As far as the the companies that test the randomness (well their in on it too). Remember Enron. Audited by arthur anderson (what a joke). These online sites have no other objective than to maximize profits in any way they can. Anything that involves gambling & money you can be assured that its crooked if allowed to be. These sites have no regulation & no reason not to cheat you. Most of the people that defend these sites are affiliates & advertise for them & are payed in some form or fashion. I remember the article written about george bush in a european magazine after the election. How can 50 million people be so dumb. I think the same about internet poker. How can so many people be so dammmm gullable. Its amazing, you can walk into a live card room where many professionals play & 80% or better that have played many hands online will tell you theres no chance the cards are random. Yet you come to these forums & so many people defend them. The real reason is that bad players cant seem to tell the difference. Its only the good players that win consistently that can tell the difference between live play & online play. Its because they cant win. When players are coming into ring games with terrible cards & calling raises cold & calling bets after the flop with no odds & a player that plays solid poker & makes a living playing cant win, somethings bad wrong. I would almost be willing to say that anyone at this forum that says they make a living playing online poker is completely full of it, unless they've made some deal with the sites as an affilitate or something & there account is protected by a fortune switch. The burden of proof is definately on those who claim randomness.

[stockman]

Just wanted to post this from another forum so that posters here that actually are serious about this thread will no that im not just trying to create a stir. I am actually a legitimate player. This is what another poster at pokerforums said about a reply to my post.

i dont really beleive or deny stockman's views but on a different note,stockman27 is one the best players on Full Tilt along with bleu329 and others..i have observed him playing 10-20 or 25-50 NL and he kicks some ass..there was a battle between him and John Juanda at 25-50,heads up and he practically owned JJ that day..
this is 100% true..even JJ was going --" I am no match for u,u r damn good",but the funny part part even then stockman was going--"now they'll put me on lose mode"" and general nonsense ,so just because he questions the validity of randomness of online poker doesnt mean he can't play.
good luck all.

[propervillain]

[ QUOTE ]
Just wanted to post this from another forum so that posters here that actually are serious about this thread will no that im not just trying to create a stir. I am actually a legitimate player. This is what another poster at pokerforums said about a reply to my post.

i dont really beleive or deny stockman's views but on a different note,stockman27 is one the best players on Full Tilt along with bleu329 and others..i have observed him playing 10-20 or 25-50 NL and he kicks some ass..there was a battle between him and John Juanda at 25-50,heads up and he practically owned JJ that day..
this is 100% true..even JJ was going --" I am no match for u,u r damn good",but the funny part part even then stockman was going--"now they'll put me on lose mode"" and general nonsense ,so just because he questions the validity of randomness of online poker doesnt mean he can't play.
good luck all.

[/ QUOTE ]

WOW, now I am convinced.

[ianlippert]

ok lets think about this for a minute. You are claiming that there are two modes for players: 'fish' mode and 'shark' mode. What exactly would the criteria be to flip ppl over? Lets assume that once a player makes 1BB/hr or more for 50K hands they are flagged as a shark. Then what happens? Every so often, but not often enough to be detected, the shark gets dealt a bad beat vs a fish to give them back some money. So now you have some 1BB/hr winners that become .5BB/hr, some 2BB/hr winners that are now 1BB/hr winners, etc. All this represents is an additional rake on the good players.

THEY WOULD MAKE MORE MONEY RAISING THE RAKE BY .01% THEN THEY WOULD BY PUNISHING A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE PLAYERS.

There, I've said it. Now stop complaining about sites being rigged and learn how to play poker. The conspiracy theories are so ridiculous its not even funny. There is absolutely no need for them to risk a huge sum of money just to gain a miniscule amount extra. If you are a poker player you should understand this concept. "hmm, I'm on the button with 72o lets go all in to steal the blinds", ya thats a great play.

[ianlippert]

I also found this article, scroll down a bit to get to the hand stats and more below that to get a good rebuttal to the conspiracy theorists.

http://www.playwinningpoker.com/rgp/02/

[stockman]

Its not even a question whether they're rigged or not. No doubt about it they are. Its just a matter of time before its out. People like you are the only reason the keep going. They arent just doing to keep tables full, they're taking your money with house players. Kind of like bookies dont just clear the juice, they win the majority of bets also. Oddsmakers handicap joe public to get majority of money on one side. Online poker sites are making killings off of suckers such as yourself.

[stockman]

The sites show absolutely no proof of randomness, sure they deal the same percentage of PP & flushes, straights etc. Thats why idiots think theyre legit. What they dont tell you is that you will get your percentage of these, but theyll give someone else (house player or poor player theyre trying to keep in the game) a better flush or straight full house giving you 2nd best hand. Or you they deal someone else absolutely nothing when you get these so you get no action. You either win nothing or lose big. Youll get your share all right. Just not your share of the money.

[doncalvi]

***** Hand History for Game 2133022400 *****
$1000 NL Hold'em - Tuesday, May 31, 04:08:40 EDT 2005
Table Table 37316 (Real Money)
Seat 7 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 2: PeglegMcgee8 ( $1007.6 )
Seat 3: CYHAPMAN ( $2906.69 )
Seat 4: Viglev ( $2000.02 )
Seat 7: yesnaya ( $550.26 )
Seat 8: pmuir12 ( $1170.15 )
Seat 10: glowe_ ( $1100.56 )
Seat 6: SSR1210 ( $3570.55 )
Seat 5: uRdRznIPlay ( $590.1 )
Seat 1: snappo1 ( $1810.5 )
pmuir12 posts small blind [$5].
glowe_ posts big blind [$10].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to SSR1210 [ Ah Ac ]
PeglegMcgee8 folds.
CYHAPMAN calls [$10].
Viglev calls [$10].
uRdRznIPlay folds.
SSR1210 raises [$120].
yesnaya folds.
pmuir12 folds.
glowe_ folds.
CYHAPMAN calls [$120]
Viglev folds
** Dealing Flop ** [ As, Ad, 2c ]
CYHAPMAN checks.
SSR1210 bets [$100].
CYHAPMAN raises [$500]
SSR1210 raises [$3450.55]
CYHAPMAN calls [$2786.69]
** Dealing Turn ** [ Ks ]
** Dealing River ** [ Qs ]
CYHAPMAN shows [ Ts, Js ] a Royal Flush.
SSR1210 shows [ Ah, Ac ] four of a kind aces.
CYHAPMAN wins $5833.8 from the main pot with a royal flush.
SSR1210 wins $663.86 from the side pot with four of a kind aces


NOW HOW CAN I TAKE ONLINE POKER LEGITIMATELY AFTER THAT? RERAISE 2000 more with J high and no draw and hit runner runner royal on my quads. Somethign is real wrong there. I wanted to kill myself after that hand

[propervillain]

how much did you win from the bad beat jackpot?

[BCl]

"poorer players are givin better flops "

well a poorer player than me your not likely to ever see so you could please explain this to me????

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=probability&Number=221 2454&fpart=&PHPSESSID=

if its fixed (and actually im not totally convinced one way or another) they certainly are not singleing out poor players to give the good starting hands to..by the way i tried PP again last night, 30,000 guar as usual. i folded every hand (again!) but 3 and was out before the 2ND break. THEY ARE NOT GIVING THE POOR PLAYERS ANY KIND OF A BREAK AND IM LIVING PROOF.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
sure they deal the same percentage of PP & flushes, straights etc. Thats why idiots think theyre legit. What they dont tell you is that you will get your percentage of these, but theyll give someone else (house player or poor player theyre trying to keep in the game) a better flush or straight full house giving you 2nd best hand. Or you they deal someone else absolutely nothing when you get these so you get no action. You either win nothing or lose big. Youll get your share all right. Just not your share of the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

How long have you played online? How many hands have you played online? How many different sites have you played on?

There was a huge thread in mid-high, "DERB", about a player who was a huge winner but was generally considered to be awful by the posters there who play high limits online, say they win big and have played a lot against him. The majority of posters said he'll go broke, some said he's not getting enough credit and some said he was a statistical anamoly. Whatever.

My point for referring that thread was your point in the quote about getting the proper percentage of hands to reference but having the disparity in pot size be extremely unequal. I've had that problem since day one online and I'm playing over a year. However, I don't think they're giving it to a "shill". I'm not sure what it is, but have wondered if it's this.

Party has about 70K players a night. When it comes to the size of the pots for your big hands, there has to be some who are very fortunate, some who aren't and probably the majority have a good balance. Even though probability can prove all of our luck will eventually even out, there's nothing to prove that all the pots should end up balancing out equally among us.

I've had a home game for years and there's one guy who is by far the luckiest player I've ever seen. He's a good player and plays very aggressively. So are a couple of us. His hands have come in much more than the rest of us over the years, believe me. He's had far more luck in winning big pots than the rest of us.

Going back to online, I 4 table 6 max and my last session I had quad 6's, flopped a full house, flopped a flush, flopped a set and turned trips. Not one of those hands had anyone with even a remotely close hand to call me with, let alone raise. I think one of them was called on the turn. Not one saw a river.

That same session I lost with AA when 22 spiked a 2 on the turn. 90% favorite and big pot lost. I flopped trips and got out kicked in a big pot. I lost full over full in a very big pot. Large winning percentage for me for the session. Extreme imbalance in winnings. It was a losing session.

I'm probably like the majority of posters on 2+2 who are more knowledgeable and play better than most, but not as well as we probably think. That old saying about never being as good or as bad as you think. The only conclusion I've come to up to this point is that I'm in that group, like yourself you're describing, who don't have the good luck that others have. No matter what you say, not everyone's luck will always be equal. So the bottom line is, either I'm a pretty good player who has to play near perfect just to have a small win, or what you say is true. I can't even make money with quads.

Considering all the people, like Al S., who say they know for a fact their friends make good money, I have to believe I must have received most of my luck in other areas of my life, which up to this point, I'd buy as a reason. My life is, save for one thing I'd change if I could, has been pretty good.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
Its not even a question whether they're rigged or not. No doubt about it they are. Its just a matter of time before its out. People like you are the only reason the keep going. They arent just doing to keep tables full, they're taking your money with house players. Kind of like bookies dont just clear the juice, they win the majority of bets also. Oddsmakers handicap joe public to get majority of money on one side. Online poker sites are making killings off of suckers such as yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all I havent made a deposit in 4 months. Second of all I withdrew the $200 that I had lost and am now playing with other ppls money. I have been tracking my hands for 4 months (playing for 8) and have just hit 30K hands. Guess what? You see runner runner, you see that scary river, you see AA vs KK. I was a winning player for 3 months, and I'm now in the middle of a 250 BB downswing. Plz tell me when they are going to flag me as a fish, I'd love to start winning.

I think you missed the point of my last post. I have to ask you, what is the point of rigging it? Is it to build a bigger pot? Or to keep the fish around? Considering that most pots are capped at a certain amount, they cannot make that much extra money by putting AA vs KK. How about the fish, are they going any where any time soon? No they arent. Any scam that funnels money from good players to bad is just an extra rake for the good players. Either they can overcome it or they cant. You greatly overestimate the number of good players (15%?), and the number of ppl that play at the higher levels. Why risk all the honest money you are making for a little bit extra? It makes zero sense not to run an honest site.

Texas holdem is the poker game with the lowest skill to luck ratio. Skill still wins out in the long run, but that run is really long. Thats why its such a great game! If you cant handle it then go play stud or something.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
CYHAPMAN wins $5833.8 from the main pot with a royal flush.


[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, the shill won $6K, at a site that probably makes tens of millions of dollars. And now you are posting it on every public message board. Rigged or not that site now has bad publicity. How many ppl have they now lost to your post? People that they would have made much more than $6K from. Dont you see how ridiculous you sound?

[primetime32]

this is the actual hand history that was sent by party poker for the game listed above. If you are going to lie about a hand at least try harder to cover up the lie. Maybe you shouldnt inclde the game number.

***** Hand History for Game 2133022400 *****
AssetStrippa has left the table.
0/0 TexasHTGameTable (NL) - Tue May 31 04:08:39 EDT 2005
Table Table 37316 (Real Money) -- Seat 7 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 1: snappo1 ( $181.5)
Seat 2: PeglegMcgee8 ( $107.6)
Seat 3: CYHAPMAN ( $196.69)
Seat 4: Viglev ( $200.02)
Seat 5: uRdRznIPlay ( $59.1)
Seat 6: SSR1210 ( $57.55)
Seat 7: yesnaya ( $55.26)
Seat 8: pmuir12 ( $117.15)
Seat 10: glowe_ ( $110.56)
pmuir12 posts small blind (0.5)
glowe_ posts big blind (1)
** Dealing down cards **
PeglegMcgee8 folds.
yesnaya: 5?
CYHAPMAN calls (1)
Viglev calls (1)
uRdRznIPlay folds.
SSR1210 folds.
yesnaya folds.
glowe_: ya
pmuir12 folds.
yesnaya: made sense
glowe_ checks.
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 2c, 4h, Qh ]
glowe_ checks.
CYHAPMAN checks.
Viglev checks.
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 4s ]
glowe_: hit a str on a flush draw
glowe_ bets (3)
yesnaya: woulda owned you
CYHAPMAN raises (6) to 6
Viglev folds.
yesnaya: had the ace hugh flush draw
glowe_ calls (3)
** Dealing River ** : [ Tc ]
glowe_ checks.
CYHAPMAN bets (25)
glowe_ calls (25)
** Summary **
Main Pot: $62.5 | Rake: $3
Board: [ 2c 4h Qh 4s Tc ]
snappo1 balance $181.5, sits out
PeglegMcgee8 balance $107.6, didn't bet (folded)
CYHAPMAN balance $227.19, bet $32, collected $62.5, net +$30.5 [ Jh Qd ] [ two pairs, queens and fours -- Qd,Qh,Jh,4h,4s ]
Viglev balance $199.02, lost $1 (folded)
uRdRznIPlay balance $59.1, didn't bet (folded)
SSR1210 balance $57.55, didn't bet (folded)
yesnaya balance $55.26, didn't bet (folded)
pmuir12 balance $116.65, lost $0.5 (folded)
Cobra_Royal balance $50, sits out
glowe_ balance $78.56, lost $32 [ 2s Td ] [ two pairs, tens and fours -- Qh,Td,Tc,4h,4s ]

[chadplusplus]

Well, just to keep this thread needlessly going...

How about a third implication against Pacific.

Two of my close friends and I all played on Pacific for a while. When I made my first deposit, I immediately went on a winning run which lasted oh, about 2 weeks. Then it all came crashing down. So I redeposited. Again, a winning run for about 2 weeks, then it all came crashing down again. And how about one more redeposit? Same thing.

So I talked to my friends about it. They had been experiencing the same thing. Both experienced winning trends for about 2 weeks after a deposit, then couldn't hit cards until they were broke - time after time.

Only one of us at the time was what I would call a good player, but the other two of us were decent/break-even players, so you could certainly blame it on poor play.

Regardless... That patterns made us uneasy. So what did we do? Just switched sites.

Interestingly, I'm pretty sure that type of winning pattern is how a lot of addicts get hooked, i.e. a big early win or early success. So, from a business stand point, this would be ideal for an online site to do (get em hooked with a big run at first, then milk em dry - then reward those pavlonian(sp?) card players with a reward each time they redeposited).

Just thought I would throw that out into the mix. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

Besides, its all moot for those of us like me who have no B&M within a 10 hour radius. So we make do, even if our BB/100 affected by -.01% just to keep the fish around.

[Matt Jenko]

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

made my day.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
this is the actual hand history that was sent by party poker for the game listed above. If you are going to lie about a hand at least try harder to cover up the lie. Maybe you shouldnt inclde the game number.


[/ QUOTE ]

haha thats funny. Why would ppl come on here and lie about stuff like that? Are they from other sites, trying to take down party? Too many conspiracies too little time /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[toots]

Busted!

[theredpill5]

wierd

I had the same thing happen when I first started at Pacific Poker. I immediately went to the .25/.50 NL games. I started winning big. Bigger than I have ever done even to this day about 5 months later. I was winning over $100/day on .25/.50 NL games but I was only playing 1 table for about 5 hours /day so you do the math. Then all of a sudden I couldn't hit a damn thing for about 2 weeks. It was a long damn time. I didn't lose my whole bankroll because I made great laydowns but I didn't win anything either. It was wierd. I would sit there on the table for hours and hours. It really tried my patience. After the 2 weeks, I went somewhere else but I still go back every now and then and it seems maybe the bad streak is over or something.

[BatsShadow]

I started playing on Pacific too, a little over a year ago. Long before they had NL. I've had my share of horrible swings, but overall, I've taken my account from the $10 free that they gave me up to somewhere around $200. I've cashed out large parts of my BR multiple times.

You guys are all silly.

[sfwusc]

it is rigged. I have two guys on my tables right now that chase with everything...they lose everytime expect when they play against me.

They have hit 2 outters and 5 outs like 10 times.

It is unreal.

-SFWUSC

[BCl]

As far as the deposit equals winning streak thing goes, is it just possible that right after you have a deposit your playing with a large bankroll and as it dwindles you begin playing with scared money? thats exactly what i used to go through in sportsbetting..you take a few more shots when you have money behind you but when the pressures on maybe you just get a little to tight and start making poor decisions..McEvoy talks about just this same syndrome in his championship poker series book..and also says some players mistake this as the site being rigged. If i were to rig a site 1 thing id do that i never hear anybody claim is being done is deal an abnormal amount of split-pots..give 2 players pocket K's then throw 3 aces on the board, they both go all-in , split the pot ..i clean up on the big rake and give the same hand to 2 more players and start it all over again. dam im a genius!!

[jman220]

Hahahha, I think the funniest part is that the guy is really a $100 nl player, and disguised it as a $1,000 nl hand. That made my day.

[paulnortonyoung]

I agree. It seems to me that if "rigging" takes place, it would be far more likely to take the form of making the deals more exciting, encouraging bigger pots amd therefore more rake. On some sites I have actually wondered if this is happening - but I have no stats to be able to say for sure.

On another point, I note that today PartyGaming announced plans to float on the London Stock Exchange. So now their share price will be at stake if anything illegit is happening. IMO, this creates a huge disincentive for them to be doing anything underhand. The OP's point about Enron is missplaced - since Enron, the big corporates are running scared of any kind of corporate scandal. I think this makes "rigging" even more unlikely.

Paul

[Al Schoonmaker]

This assertion is so absurd that I am surprised that so many people have bothered to reply. There may be some cheating by online sites, but to claim that it is 100% rigged is ridiculous.

100% means ALL. Does any sane person believe that it is ALL rigged?

Regards,

Al

[LoveMyAces]

[ QUOTE ]
agree. It seems to me that if "rigging" takes place, it would be far more likely to take the form of making the deals more exciting, encouraging bigger pots and therefore more rake. On some sites I have actually wondered if this is happening - but I have no stats to be able to say for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be suspicious and recognizable. The goal would be to get and keep players (Fish included). get as much rake as possible, make the games last as long as possible and remain within the statistical percentages so no proof is possible. The computer is made to do complex calculations with ease. It would be trivial to write a program that accomplishes all of these goals without being suspicious at the same time.

From my earlier post:

The thing is if you try to find out how the RNG is tested and verified while in use and safegaurded from tampering you can find out nothing. I have emailed BMM, Iglobal, and other verification sites and not one returned my email. If they are completely honest and using great methods to insure that the deals are honest why is it you get smoke and mirrors when you try to find out the methods? If you go to the web sites of these verification firms you get a run around. At the Poker web sites where you play you get a hazy picture and run around. If this is being done fairly and honestly why not show the exact method of testing, verification, and tamper proofing of the RNG in live use play? They should be screaming this from the roof. It should be in every banner add and a complete page dedicated to it on the sites where you play. Why don't they want the us to know? Has anyone else tried to dig out this information?

[daetcher]

Okay. I suppose I am in no position to say whether stockman's alleged cheating is true. What seems clear, however, is that the evidence most people give for saying the sites are rigged, is poor at best. It's a long series of whiny anecdotes like when that crazy guy took $530.76 from you even though he only had two outs after the turn. You remember all these disappointing experiences and cannot ever remember any times when you were the guy winning despite terrible odds. Is this because you forget those times? No, I won't go that far. It's because you're a good poker player, and as a result, you never set yourself up to win hands like that.

I think its safe to assume that everyone on these forums is moderately good to very good at playing poker. We fold the bad hands and raise with the good ones. We don't call with ridiculously bad odds. Bad players are different. Because they make those bad plays, they set themselves up to occasionally win those improbable hands. Good players, by nature of the game, lose these sometimes. It has happened to all of us, many times. That doesn't mean its rigged. It means we are decent players.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
The thing is if you try to find out how the RNG is tested and verified while in use and safegaurded from tampering you can find out nothing. I have emailed BMM, Iglobal, and other verification sites and not one returned my email. If they are completely honest and using great methods to insure that the deals are honest why is it you get smoke and mirrors when you try to find out the methods? If you go to the web sites of these verification firms you get a run around. At the Poker web sites where you play you get a hazy picture and run around. If this is being done fairly and honestly why not show the exact method of testing, verification, and tamper proofing of the RNG in live use play? They should be screaming this from the roof. It should be in every banner add and a complete page dedicated to it on the sites where you play. Why don't they want the us to know? Has anyone else tried to dig out this information?


[/ QUOTE ]

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe they're so secretive about the RNG, and how its tested, because they don't want anybody to figure out how the RNG works, and thus predict the cards? Seems like it would be a sensible precaution to me. I wouldn't want them talking about how the RNG works out there because then it would make it much easier for a programmer to figure out what the algorithm is, what clock cycle it is based on, and then write a program that would let him know what everyone's hole cards and what the board will be. If I remember correctly, someone cracked an RNG for Vegas Draw Poker machines sometime back, in a similar matter. All you conspiracy theorists are just ignoring this simple, and obvious explanation for the secretiveness concerning the RNG, and how it is tested.

[LoveMyAces]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks that maybe they're so secretive about the RNG, and how its tested, because they don't want anybody to figure out how the RNG works, and thus predict the cards? Seems like it would be a sensible precaution to me. I wouldn't want them talking about how the RNG works out there because then it would make it much easier for a programmer to figure out what the algorithm is, what clock cycle it is based on, and then write a program that would let him know what everyone's hole cards and what the board will be. If I remember correctly, someone cracked an RNG for Vegas Draw Poker machines sometime back, in a similar matter. All you conspiracy theorists are just ignoring this simple, and obvious explanation for the secretiveness concerning the RNG, and how it is tested.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are not worried about this in the least! With 168 bit encryption it would take all the computer power on earth 100 years to break just one algorithm. Besides they will tell you exactly how the RNG works on their web sites. They tell you exactly how many shuffles and that they take random mouse clicks and other input to make it unpredictable. The question that I can't get answered is what happens after the verification company's test the RNG. How do they verify that the RNG they tested is used. How do they insure that it keeps being used. Why is this not common knowledge by everyone that plays online poker!

[RoyalLance]

If you think online poker is fixed and has "house players". Please do us a favor and stop playing online. And please do everyone a favor stop posting stuff which has already been posted by hundreds of praranoid players. You are getting nowhere.

Can we close this thread please?

[theredpill7]

[Mike Cuneo]

shut up

[1rainbow]

yea u have to be very lucky to win a lot

[hockey1]

If the site cheats in favor of "poorer players" then I must suck BIGTIME.

[toots]

That would provide an incentive to not improve.

It's ok with me if you want to go that route. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Yeh i have deffinatly experienced that. Especially at pacifc poker. When i dont play for ages and then stick on 50 dollars i do seem to fall into a rediculusly good set of starting hands... Amount of times ive had AK AQ AA KK within 20 hands. I mean how often should you get AA 3 or 4 times with in 20 hands in a live game i know not that often its a rarity and its happend a bit too much to me in online poker to make it seem a bit odd. N e ways who knows at the end of the day as long as you play tight and keep aggressive, chose the right tables with the loose players then genraly there should be a profit to be found? (He says when hes 700 nicker down!). Play safe and may your pots be big and your cards live! peace

[ QUOTE ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This poster is wrong, and so are you about Randi. James Randi is an idiot, several people have offered to take him on over the so-called offer for ESP but he has the habit of setting impossible-to-meet conditions (so I have heard). If you want proof of the existence of ESP speak to the Military regarding their "remote viewing" experiments (both in the USA and Soviet Union) or maybe just take a look at the results produced by the internationally respected PEAR Lab. at Princeton University (Princeton Engineering Anonmalies Research Laboratory). They have a website and some of the research and background is published in their book "Margins of Reality".

It is not a question of whether ESP exists or not, it exists and demonstrably so. The problem is (i) providing some kind of mechanism to explain it, which is necessary for any theory to have credence and (ii) finding out the practical uses and limitations.

Those who belong to the "there is no evidence" are basically the same as Randi "we refuse to listen, we refuse to see, so we refute (as we have neither seen or heard)". There is a huge and growing body of credible evidence if you would only bother to look (which you clearly have not). Sure there are any number of crackpots, but there are also a growing number of respected physicists and psychologist, surgeons etc. that now accept its existence both from experimental data and the substantial quantity of anecdotal and experiential evidence. If you refuse to believe it, you are a fool, the evidence is overwhelming. Oh well, I hope your flat-earth membership goes though ok...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You are wrong my friend - I know James Randi and he is a genius. It is always the frauds and fakers who claim his testing methods are unfair - because it prevents them from cheating. His methods are extremely fair and scientific.

As to your claim of internationally respected PEAR Lab. at Princeton University (Princeton Engineering Anonmalies Research Laboratory). I did a google on it and not one reference came up. How respected is it you Bozo????

[/ QUOTE ]

Errrrr i just did a google for PEAR lab and it came up with 747,000 found of which the first 1-10 were all about the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research So i dont know what google site you were using...

Prehaps its a fake one set up by the illuminati

Peace

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

After 150,000 hands of winning poker, I have yet to lose my money. It seems likely that you have failed to make the adjustment to online play. For quite a while I was dominating the online game, but losing live. I made some adjustments and am doing quite well in live play as well.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but maybe you just suck at online poker. More likely, you have not given the game the proper chance, and with the proper roll.

I have some doubts too Mr. Stockman. The ramdomness of the shuffle has got to be suspect. I know many of you as well as myself have had the same two pocket cards delt back to back dozens of times over a short period of hands( ie.small sample that the doubters like to use to discredit the doubters.)Also, how common are AA & KK & QQ back to back as well as drawing pre-lop in the same 1 hour game? But does that translate into rigging?? Still don't like it. :

[LoveMyAces]

[ QUOTE ]
I have some doubts too Mr. Stockman.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone who does not have questions about the dealing of cards out of a computer halfway around the world is a fool. I don't think poker can reach its full potential until these questions are addressed in a fashion where we can all rest assured that everything is being done to prevent tampering. The software should be checked by a legitimate company, packaged and delivered by a representative of that company, installed and guarded by a independent agent 24/7 and all available information about the process (logs of times and dates) should be made available to the poker players of the web site. The program should include a log of any changes made to the program and that displayed online. If they have nothing to hide why not make all of us aware of the information? The lack of information and not answering emails with questions about the testing of the software is the only reason I am involved in this discussion.

We the poker players are spending hundreds of millions on the rake for these card rooms. Why not demand a fair deal or all of us join together and invest in our own server and software guaranteed to be fair and non-profit! The cost of equipment, employees and constant work to insure the best software would make the rake almost nothing and put those hundreds of millions in the hands of the players where they belong!

Maybe, but you did't address the question of the funny deals.

[senjitsu]

Assuming you dont have to get them in any particular order, probably about 1/1.5 million.. which means on the big sites, it should happen to three or four people a day... combined on the biggest sites, that probably makes for 10-20 people getting consecutive 1 each AA KK QQ on eqch hand every day... to be conservative say 100 a week.

Thats why there's a lot of people with those kind of stories.


[ QUOTE ]
Also, how common are AA & KK & QQ back to back as well as drawing pre-lop in the same 1 hour game? But does that translate into rigging?? Still don't like it. :

[/ QUOTE ]

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

Strange things happen. Saw a guy get AA three hands in a row. He raised every time, showed his hand every time, lost all three hands. Rigged? Doubtful. This happened at a B&M, using two different decks, a Shufflemaster, and, of course, a dealer cut.

[DDH]

So how can I rig the games to give me AA and KK more the once a tournament? Or once every two tournaments, or sometimes five. There are weeks when I'd kill for an AKo.

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard all the money made by NASA selling photo-rights for the faked Apollo moon missions is being used to set-up poker sites with the sole purpose of funding another fake mission to Mars. Of course this is only idle hearsay and I'd be very happy to see some EVIDENCE.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is quite possible...but why would they need funding for a FAKE mission to Mars, hmmmm????

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ianlippert]

one SNG I got dealt AA 4 times!!!

Almost sent me packing when they got cracked twice, scored a small pot, and one medium pot. Definately rigged!

[Dan Mezick]

You'll like this:

Proof That Online Poker is Rigged (http://www.billrini.com/index.php/2004/11/30/proof-that-online-poker-is-rigged)

[Al Schoonmaker]

Dan,
Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

Al

[villainy]

With all due respect....If you can't spell 'naive' or 'gullible' correctly....how can I take your reasoning
seriously???

[villainy]

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/
http://skepdic.com/pear.html
http://www.experiencefestival.com/princeton_engineering_anomalies_research

Not to be insulting but your 'googling' skills might need some work.

Ive been playing at Poker Room for about 6 months, and I have to say I agree with the original poster. I dont think its rigged against any one person, I think its rigged to encourage action and large second best hand losses. And it is. You all can say , oh what an idiot, learn how to play all you want. Ive requested my hand history from Poker Room on numerous occasions, and they will not give it to me. I have suffered so many unbeleivable losses that I am convinced they deal one great hand, and one hand that is just slightly greater than that one. Its so obvious, all you have to do is pay attention. At Poker Room, every third flop is suited, and every other flop, comes an ace.
Some examples of my losses here we go, and not a word of a lie here, these ALL happened.

Loss 1. This was my first inkling of the "two great hands theory". I was dealt pocket kings. Flop was king seven queen. I immediately went all in, and I was called. My opponent was holding queen four, and he was MY ONLY opponent. Turn came queen, ok I think, no problem Im still way ahead and he needs an absolute miracle to beat me. River turns queen. Right then and there, I thought this has to be rigged. NO WAY I HIT KINGS OVER, AND GET BEAT BY RUNNER RUNNER RUNNER QUEENS, ON A CALL WITH QUEEN FOUR.

Hand 2. This one had occured on numerous occasions. I would say at the very least, 5 times, and probably closer to ten times. Dealt Ace whatever suited. Flop the flush. Winner 99.999999999999999999999999999% of the time. Once again, all in after flop. Flop was queen four seven spades. I WAS CALLED WITH JACK FOUR UNSUITED. Imagine my exuberance when I saw what this weak weak player called with. Instant double up. HOLD ON. Turn is jack, ok so he lucks out two pair, no problem. River, jack, hmmmmm, yet another absolute miracle river card. Alright I say, this happens on occasion, suck it up and move ahead. Unfortunately, I have fallen victim to this EXACT scenario a few more times since, as stated above.

3. Ace jack dealt. Opponent goes all in, I call. He has Ace jack. Split pot right? Not quite, he hits a four card flush.Most of the other players agree with me when I mention that that hand was bs.

Those are just a couple of examples, trust me though, I have taken at the very least 50 of these types of beats. And I would wager its closer too 100.
I am an experienced player, I play only good hands, Ace Eight and up mostly. I see the flop on pocket pairs, and bet from there. I VERY RARELY GO ALL IN, UNLESS ITS FORCED ON ME.
I play one out of every 20 or so hands I would estimate. I lose with the better hand, 75% of the time.
This very evening, I played ONE hand at a table, was given diamonds and hit the flush. I was against one other player, my flush was queen high. This was probably the first hand in thirty that I deemed playable. Imagine my disgust when he turned over a king high flush. Indeed, once again, this happens quite often in poker. I understand that. But, the odds are pretty high against my opponent having my flush beat. And it happens to me at least once at EVERY table I sit at.
I would estimate, that out of every 20 hands I deem playable, I either get rivered or badly beaten on 15 of them. By badly beaten I mean I flop a straight, make a large bet, and someone has either a slightly higher straight, or a four card flush will hit, whatever it is.
The norm for me is to have this person beaten, and they hit some miracle bs 2% river card to make thier hand. Way too often this happens.
And dont give me this, "you see way more hands online"[censored]. I play tourneys, and I see the same amount of hands as I do live, only faster.
I have been playing holdem for some 12 years now, and I can honestly say I have had more incredibly miracle losses in 6 months on Poker Room than I have had live in 20 years of all kinds of poker play.
Now, I dont give a flying [censored] if you believe me or not. If I play one hand at one table, and I watch 5 people before me get knocked out on bad beats, then I flop a flush, and someone rivers a full house, you cannot tell me this happens over and over live. Once in a while, sure, but over and over, NO WAY.
You pay a fee to play a tourney. Once you are OFF that table, you must pay another fee to play again. Therefore, in order to maximize their profits, poker rooms want the players, regardless of who they are, off the table quicker. Dealing a flush on the flop, with a river full house, will most likely eliminate a player from the table. I have witnessed this FAR TOO OFTEN to think the cards dealt at this poker room are 100% random.
They may be unpredictable, and they may be shuffled one million times, but that does NOT mean they are 100% random.
Im not some dumbass who suffered one bad beat then said oh its rigged. Like I said before, it has taken hundreds of large bet losses on incredibly UNLIKELY miracle turn and river cards for me to come too this conclusion.
If Poker Room would supply me with my hand history, I could prove beyond a doubt my theory.
I tried playing at a different room, one that claims they have the best shuffle on the internet. Absolute poker. I played there for 4 days. I managed to come out with a good amount of profit. BUT, I believe I should have had more. One day I played, I had 3 nut flushes rivered by full houses. Once again, tourney tables, so the same number of hands as live, except faster. I wont play there again.
One thing I do find interesting about Poker Room. When the table is down to about 3 or 4 players, my cards improve tenfold. Face cards or ace on almost every deal. Usually, if you get too the end of the hand, you will notice, ace ten, ace nine, and king jack. I dont think so.
Anyways, I would much rather be dealt 27 and fold, than get pocket kings with 3 players left, only to go all in, to find pocket aces on the table. Happens WAY TOO MUCH.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop the flush. Winner 99.999999999999999999999999999% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't believe in numbers the same way I do.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont think its rigged against any one person, I think its rigged to encourage action and large second best hand losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

Welcome to Texas Hold'em!

[King_Striker]

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Online Poker not being rigged have two arguments to defend it: They are making too much money to rig it and the have a credibility to protect.


[/ QUOTE ]

Online poker being rigged have NO arguments to defend it.

The cards do a good job of dealing bad beats by themselves. If they wanted more money, they'd increase the rake by 1%. Conspiracy theorists underestimate how much rake is taken in these games.

[Al Schoonmaker]

Conspiracy thinkers also ignore the fact that they play FAR more hands per hour online. If someone is playing four tables, he is seeing about TEN times as many hands per hour as someone playing in a B&M room. Rare events happen more often just because there are more hands.

The conspiracy theorists are desperate to find an excuse for the fact that they lose. They can't accept reality: They lose because they play poorly.

Regards,

Al

[King_Striker]

[tylerdurden]

I've been avoiding this thread since it's obviously retarded, but now I'm a believer. I just finished the Pokerstars 20% bonus, and on the NEXT hand, I get QQ in EP, raise, get one caller, flop QTx all spades, turn a boat with Td, and run into pocket TT. wiping out most of my bonus. It can't get any more rigged than that.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
I think one knows when he plays poorly. Do you know anyone that makes a constent living off online Poker?

[/ QUOTE ]


Your first statement is off, as a vast majority of poker players do NOT play well, but if you asked them, most would say that they do.

The second is likewise strange as there are dozens (hundreds?) of people on this site (myself included) who make more money playing online poker than most do with full-time jobs ... and many of us (myself included) play part-time.

And, no, I'm not a shill for a site (I don't even get any rake-back deal -- how pathetic is that?!?!).

To summarize: Dr. Al, as per his usual, is dead-on with his comments.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[RedManPlus]

I have no idea just ** HOW MUCH ** rigged online poker is...
There is absolutely no proof one way or the other.

And the 2 arguements:

(a) They are making too much money to cheat
(b) They have "reputations" to protect

Are ludicrously naive and juvenile.
How old are you guys? Are you all 18?

The NYSE Specialists CHEAT all the time.
I make 100 trades/day...
And get cheated on about 10%.
Nothing I can do...
Just absorb it as the cost of doing business.

Online casino fraud...
MUST be waaaay higher stock exchange fraud.

And you have to understand software system development.
These poker servers and clients went through extensive testing.

To test the software...
You have to deal ** pre-programmed sequences **...
To correct a problem...
And to make sure all situations are debugged.

So every poker server has built in "testing hooks"...
Whereby they can easily deal preprogrammed sequences.

This is all run from India or whatever...
Life is cheap in India...
Who's gonna talk? To whom? For what?

Also...
You zombies completely ignore the issue...
That pros and poker sites are in DIRECT competition...
For the fish money.

The easiest way to boost revenue...
Would be to ban the 5% best players...
And heavily advertize your site as strictly non-pro.

This will happen sooner than anyone thinks.
In InterTops TOS... pros are already banned.


Now I'm really getting paranoid...
I'll bet half the posters here are Bots.

Sklansky is probably using Bots to drive up the traffic...
So he can charge double for all those banner ads.

Say it ain't so.

If you can't trust David...
Then life has no meaning.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[silencee]

[ QUOTE ]
Dealt Ace whatever suited. Flop the flush. Winner 99.999999999999999999999999999% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol.

[ QUOTE ]
Ace jack dealt. Opponent goes all in, I call.

I am an experienced player, I play only good hands, Ace Eight

[/ QUOTE ]

lol.

[ QUOTE ]
I lose with the better hand, 75% of the time.
This very evening, I played ONE hand at a table, was given diamonds and hit the flush. I was against one other player, my flush was queen high. This was probably the first hand in thirty that I deemed playable. Imagine my disgust when he turned over a king high flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol.

So basically, you can make up random statistics, call all-ins with AJ, deem A8 a wonderful hand, and get upset when you play Qxs garbage and it gets beat by Kxs garbage, therefore online poker is rigged?

Funny man.

[King_Striker]

[ianlippert]

what you conspiracy theorists dont understand is that the site would make way more money increasing their rake by .01% than they ever would with rigging/shills/any other crazy stuff you can come up with. The best part is that none of the fish would notice, only the pros that keep track of that stuff would. The pros would leave, leaving what you claim to be the perfect situation for the sites: fish only.

If you think you are being cheated, dont play!

[King_Striker]

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
Now who could possibly dodge those kind of bullets?

[/ QUOTE ]

Neo.

*sniff sniff*

I smell troll. They don't make people this stupid anymore.

[Two_Slick]

I'm hoping not to be repetitive and attempting to add some perspective to this mess of a thread. A few things to ponder:

1) Too many of these discussions are very non-specific. They would be much more interesting if people didn't make blanket statements. I'd much rather here someone say "Low limit hold'em at site XXXX I consistently have noticed this." Allowing others to respond. Saying all online poker is rigged would be like saying everything that is round is a cake. Until you get specific there is no way of telling what actually is and what isn't.

2) It is plausible that some some sites would try to make more money if they were sure they wouldn't be caught. However, many of the ways which are suggested are absurd. I'm not saying it's impossible, but as a senior software developer/designer, attempting to write a program that, over a large number of hands, is consistent with probabilities and odds for all players and somehow builds in a house advantage would be a large undertaking to put it mildly. Imagine trying to build this "rigged" software that gives everyone an even distribution of cards over the long haul, but still cheats. It's not very likely.

3) In defense of those claiming it is rigged I will say this:

a) Perhaps people who claim the site isn't rigged can't post 1000's of hands played with analysis because if they played this much they'd probably lose their shirt. Maybe they are fish... who's to say. I definitely wouldn't continue playing on a site that I thought was rigged, so I wouldn't be able to post a lengthy history over many hands. Hand histories I've seen by pros who do have thousands of hands analyzed make a very compelling argument that these sites are in fact not rigged (the one posted earlier in this chain was excellent).

b) From personal experience I have seen a lot more bad beats in NL tournies (I've only played on PP) than on a limit table. I'm not sure if that's the case, or if it's just more noticeable when someone gets knocked out of a tourney. Either way, any site would definitely benefit by speeding up tournies with horrendous bad beats so there may be something to this.

c) I too have experienced a rush of winning $900 upswing when coming back to PP 2 months ago, followed by a -140 BB downswing (-$1400). Thinking that the site is rigged sure would make me feel much better, but the truth is probably that I am running pretty bad and that there are leaks in my game. It would feel great if the site were rigged because then I'm neither unlucky or a bad player... some times the truth hurts. That being said, it does stand to reason that initial winning streaks would help keep people playing longer. A number of times I have noticed new players at single-table NL tournies that play terribly and get off to amazing starts. Just last night noticed a player @ $10/1 NL tourney calling down every hand who was 88.8% in the money over his first 9 tournies. He was also dealt AA 3 times that I saw.

My 2 cents:

Before posting, I would consider what you hope to accomplish? If you want to feel better about losing, posting something like online poker is 100% rigged probably won't help. If you truly want to have a discussion about this, post something meaningful and be very specific. If you want to talk about how you feel then post on the Psychology thread (that's what I did /images/graemlins/smile.gif ).

[King_Striker]

[King_Striker]

[Two_Slick]

You sound like your on tilt /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[kasey2004]

Online poker is rigged !!! (http://http://www.billrini.com/index.php/2004/11/30/proof-that-online-poker-is-rigged )

[kasey2004]

whoops changed link

Proof !! (http://www.billrini.com/index.php/2004/11/30/proof-that-online-poker-is-rigged)

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
What's a $3 rake or $3.30 rake per hand compared to your entire $500 bankroll?

[/ QUOTE ]

well lets do the math. Its 5:00pm right now and here are how the tables break down at party


Level, #of tables, Avg Pot size, .01%rake/hand(all tables)
.5/1 200 6BB $12
1/2 200 6BB $24
2/4 100 6BB $24
3/6 60 6BB $21.6
5/10 120 5BB $60
10/20 60 5BB $60
15/30 30 5BB $54
20/40 20 5BB $40
30/60 30 5BB $90

Total amount of rake taken per hand: $385.6
Assuming an average of 60 hands/hr we get a total rake of $23136, and thats just the limit tables!

Let me repeat this for you because it makes me sick how much legitimate money these sites are raking in.

If party poker were to increase their rake by one-tenth of one-percent they would make an additional $23K/hr!!!

Multiply that by 500 (to get the 5% rake) and we figure that the party poker limit tables are raking in $11M/hr. Shills are never going to come close to making this, and to rig the deck in such a way as for it not to be noticable would never be able to come close to this amount of money.

If party wants to rig their site for more $$$ their best course of action is to raise the rake. So please take your BS conspiracy theories elsewhere.

[Al Schoonmaker]

You asked: "Do you know anyone that makes a constent living off online?"

Of course, I do, and there are a LOT of them. In fact, on the psychology forum we have a very long thread about college kids' turning pro. I am against their dropping out of college, but the fact that some of them are reporting HUGE incomes from online poker clearly indicates that SOME people are beating online poker.

You stated: "I think one knows when he plays poorly." NO, NO, NO. The tendency to overestimate one's own skill is so pronounced that David mentioned it on the very first page of "The Theory of Poker."

Part Two of my next book focuses on this tendency and it quotes several other poker authorities such as Roy Cooke, Ed Miller, and Mason.

In fact, Roy argues that MOST people overestimate their own skills. You can read my article on that subject at cardplayer.com.

If someone loses consistently at poker (either B&M or online), there is only one plausible cause: He does not play well enough to beat his competition. The conspiracy theories are just ego-defending nonsense.

I must state that the OP sent me a PM insisting that he had been cheated. The ONLY evidence he offered is that he had lost playing against John Juanda, one of the world's best players. I have repeatedly asked for evidence, and I have seen none.

I am sure that there is some cheating online, but the claim that it is rigged 100% is too childish to take seriously.

He and man others simply cannot accept the truth: They don't play well enough to beat their opposition. Until you learn to evaluate yourself and your opposition objectively, you have almost no chance to win at poker.

Regards,

Al

[King_Striker]

[AgentBishop]

You know, I wanted to stay away from this ridiculous thread because I didn't want to get involved in an absurd argument with someone who is a close minded cynical idiot with the benefit of anonymity. You can say what you want when you are mad because no one knows who you are. You could very well be a regular poster here who has created a new identity just for this CRAP! Quite frankly, I'm disappointed in some of the posters here for even responding to this crap with valid arguments they know the idiots won't listen to and keeping this thread alive. Inevitable leading to my own post on this nonsense.


Dear Conspiracy Theorist,

If you feel this strongly about it maybe you should do a serious bit of research and form a factual opinion based on FACTS.

These sites you speak of hire third party multi-BILLION dollar corperationS (notice its plural! meaning more than one "fictitious" company) to come in and review new log files, monitor tables, and inspect software to verify the site is in no way cheating.
Idiot says: Don't you think party poker could pay them off to say the what they want them to say or maybe forge the documents.
Answer: Do you really think that A) the poker site is going to risk its billion dollar Corporation on your little "$500 bankroll." BTW if you manage to lose your entire bankroll at one table, you have other issues you need to deal with. So many issues that no one would read this because it would be MUCH longer than it is. And B) Do you ACTUALLY think these Corporations that have put their name on the line, would risk THEIR BILLION DOLLAR Corporation for Party Poker? NO!! Party couldn't pay them enough. And if party happen to OWN these corporations, see part B! All the blatant cheating in the world on ALL site couldn't make this +EV. They would have to cheat SO BAD it would be obvious, which leads me to another point.
People have posted their database numbers here of 250k, 300k, and up hands with everything as it should be. Just like the odds say they should be. Thus making it impossible for the site to be blatantly out right cheating like they would need to be to out weigh the risks of 3 or more MULTI-BILLION dollar Corporations. And C) Forgery? Come on!

For those of you questioning the randomness of the "Random" number generator, get a clue as well. For one, see above and two, do a little research and you will feel better.

Now listen up. Pay attention to what EVERYONE, who is undoubtedly more intelligent than you, is saying: You game is poor, you bankroll management is even worse, "People know if they are no good at poker" is an extremely ludicrous statement to make, Online poker sites DO have to much to risk, so do the third party Corporations if they lie, and people have posted HARD FACTUAL numbers that supports the expected LONG TERM outcome dictated by the MATHEMATICAL odds. Quit placing the blame somewhere else, it is your fault for losing money in the long run.

[JayKon]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying it's impossible, but as a senior software developer/designer, attempting to write a program that, over a large number of hands, is consistent with probabilities and odds for all players and somehow builds in a house advantage would be a large undertaking to put it mildly. Imagine trying to build this "rigged" software that gives everyone an even distribution of cards over the long haul, but still cheats. It's not very likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

I too am a senior IT guy, as are more people on this forum than you might guess. And I disagree, not with your statement, but with your implication. Given the volume of data available, the number of hands it takes to get a usable confidence interval and the potential benifit a site _could_ receive, I know I could rig the deal in favor of the fish in order to maximize rake without it showing up in the stats.

Would it be hard? Yes? But then every senior IT guy I've met got there by being able to do the hard projects.

That said, I do not beleive Party, Paradise, Stars, or Planet is rigged in any way, shape, or form ... Pacific ... who knows, never played there and given the bad things I've heard - never will.

[Al Schoonmaker]

Thank you.

[King_Striker]

[RedManPlus]

There isn't a single FACT in your Apologia, AgentBishop.

For example...
Party Poker software...
Is provided by iGlobalMedia.

iGlobalMedia has changed it's name to Party Gaming...
And is going public as the owner of Party Poker.

But even today...
On the Party Poker web site...
It is strongly implied that iGlobalMedia...
Which no longer exists...
Is keeping their Poker server safe and secure from fraud.

This is laughable.

OK...
Just give 2 software auditors...
That you call "billion dollar" companies...
Operating within a mature legal system...
That are guarenteeing the security of online casino software...
In any real legal sense.

I doubt it can be an American or Canadian company...
Or foreign subsidiary of such...
Because "anti-money laundering statutes"...
Forbid any association.

PayPal was forced by the Justice Department...
To withdraw all services to off-shore casinos...
Because their capitalization/ownership/regulation is highly suspect and/or unkown.

Dealing with some facts...
Would be a good start.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[AgentBishop]

[ QUOTE ]
In real life, even for a fun game with no money involved, no one would called a preflop raised AA2 flop with 4-8 offsuited. That kind of BS happenned to me like a hundred times. And ALWAYS hitting runner-runner.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it ALWAYS happened there would be proof in these MASSIVE databases people have. Also, more than a few select idiots, would realize it. I mean these are poker players! They are at leaset a LITTLE observant. sheesh!

[ QUOTE ]

*****hand deleted becuase of lack of data****

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

Have A/images/graemlins/spade.gifA/images/graemlins/club.gif against A/images/graemlins/heart.gif2/images/graemlins/spade.gif

Flop A/images/graemlins/diamond.gifx/images/graemlins/spade.gifx/images/graemlins/spade.gif
Turn: x/images/graemlins/spade.gif River: x/images/graemlins/spade.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm guessing the little x's are 3,4,5,6 of spades and you lost to str8 flush. If you have played enough to form such a strong opinion this is bound to happen. It's not impossible. If you say "but it ALWAYS happens", see my first comment and stop insulting mine and everyone elses intelligence who play online.

[ QUOTE ]

Want a list? These 1 in 990 bad-beats ONLY happen online. In my years of playing Poker B&M I have not seen as many bad beats, nor as many bad calls winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, to say it only happens online is REDICULOUS! but then you go on to say "as many bad beats", reffering to B&M play. Thats what everyone is trying to tell you! You play a LOT more hands per hour than B&M play.

[ QUOTE ]

You don't have to believe me if you don't wanna. You will learn the hard way.[\quote]

Fine. But you, the great poker player who is always WAY WAY ahead in every hand, just go ahead and leave the fish to the rest of us. It's cool. I don't mind. But for the record YOU ARE ONE!

[ QUOTE ]

Just how often in a tournament do you see AK going heads up against AQ. Or AA against TT and losing? You can anticipate it almost every hand in online RIGGED poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

AK vs. AQ about %23. AA vs. TT about %20 percent. Hardly ALWAYS and hardly never. You have to keep in mind that it's a tourney with raising blinds, people can't just sit and wait. Of course you're gonna see this. Every hand? Come ON! There would be proof. Not just a few losers words.

I don't believe there is anything that ANYONE on this earth or in heaven could say to you(that's ALL you literal losers) to get you to understand. Therfore after I answer RunOnRainMan below you, I will no longer be wasting my time with these types of threads or topics.

[King_Striker]

[AgentBishop]

First of all, learn how to structure a damn sentence. I meane seriously. Im not english major and my setneces have errors for sure, but this crap you wrote is unbelievable.

[ QUOTE ]
For example...
Party Poker software...
Is provided by iGlobalMedia.

iGlobalMedia has changed it's name to Party Gaming...
And is going public as the owner of Party Poker.

But even today...
On the Party Poker web site...
It is strongly implied that iGlobalMedia...
Which no longer exists...
Is keeping their Poker server safe and secure from fraud.


[/ QUOTE ]

What's your point? The company still exists but its called Party Gaming just like you said. They own party poker, star luck casino, and party bingo as well. Either way the software is certified by a INDEPENDANT third party company called iTech (http://www.itechlabs.com.au/services/gamingsystem.htm)

Party is a member of IGC. A nonprofit INDEPENDENT organization and they have a Code of Conduct (http://www.igcouncil.org/aboutus.php?id=3) that party has to abide by.


Not to mention there are several "skins" that are a seperate business themselves from Party Gaming but use their software, and servers. This ,as you probably know, alows the affiliates' players to play in Party's much larger rooms. As a result they get a portion of the rake from Party.

[ QUOTE ]
Just give 2 software auditors...
That you call "billion dollar" companies...
Operating within a mature legal system...
That are guarenteeing the security of online casino software...
In any real legal sense.

I doubt it can be an American or Canadian company...
Or foreign subsidiary of such...
Because "anti-money laundering statutes"...
Forbid any association.


[/ QUOTE ]

Party is a member of IGC(Canadian BTW) as stated above and complies to their Code of Conduct. This means allowing an independent third party company com in and review logs and guarantee them to be fair and random. Party Certificate (http://www.partypoker.com/itech_PartyPoker_certificate.html)

Paradise is under Kahnawake Gaming Commission that is for instensive purposes the same as IGC. Paradise certificate (http://www.paradisepoker.com/pwc_review.html)

Poker Stars is with KGC as well and are inspected by two companies. Here (http://www.pokerstars.com/rng_audit.html)

Ultimatebet uses KGC too. KGC usually has BMMi conduct the inspection but I am unable to find UB's certificate online.

All party skins will be the same as party. I could go through all the sites but what would be the point. If you want to know about the site you play at, just look it up.

[ QUOTE ]
PayPal was forced by the Justice Department...
To withdraw all services to off-shore casinos...
Because their capitalization/ownership/regulation is highly suspect and/or unkown.


[/ QUOTE ]
What does that have to do with rigged online poker games? But since you brought it up, PayPal was being sued by individual states for transferring money to online gambling sites. Ebay has since bought PayPal and has decided not to allow money transfer to online casinos. I saw nothing about them being "forced" to do anything except getting sued. That would force me to stop a lot of things.

Come on people! If you have questions about stuff like this, do a little research yourself. It's if you still don't feel comfortable with then STOP PLAYING! Simple.

[King_Striker]

[silvershade]

I'm not necessarily convinced that online poker is rigged, I dont really think that there's evidence of it, but I think that there is enough grey area to be a little suspicious that some sites out there might be rigged given the general lack of regulation.

Why would they rig it? Well fairly obviously if they did it would be a matter of keeping fish in the tank and indeed growing the number. More players means a bigger rake and if you plan on floating at some point then a better share price. Of course it is debatable as to whether you actually need to rig given the nature of Hold'em which is generally a nice game for the fish anyway.

How would you rig? Obviously rigging wouldnt be against a specific individual or in a specific individual's favour, you'd simply adjust the distribution of cards to ensure a few more suckouts for the sharks and a few extra wins for the fish. I'm not clear how anyone would ever know given that you did a good job with the algorithm. Basically everyone would get the same cards over time but you'd lose with a good hand more often as more big hands would trip over each other.

Is it even possible? As a senior software developer with some experience in writing financial modelling software I wouldnt be willing to say its impossible. Especially given the sums available in the industry, if someone with resources was motivated I reckon that they could rig and you would never likely never see it.

On balance I dont think its likely that the sites are rigged though. I see things happen online that sometimes makes my mouth drop, I dont see this stuff in B&M but then I dont play thousands of hands there either.

[RedManPlus]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, learn how to structure a damn sentence. I meane seriously. Im not english major and my setneces have errors for sure, but this crap you wrote is unbelievable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Congratulations...
You made 3 grammatical/spelling errors in the first 2 sentences.

The "proof" provided is laughable...
If one knows anything about complex software systems.
(I have a degree in Computer Science).

(1) "Party Poker Certificate"

A firm from Australia certifies...
That the RNG algorithm is good one.
So what?

No poker site would cheat by tinkering with the RNG...
They would cheat by ** circumventing ** the RNG...
That is...
By dealing pre-programmed sequences...
Rather than RNG sequences.

Do you understand the difference?
Do you understand how software is coded, complied, and run in production?
And distributed around the globe?
And how easily one can manipulate software?

Basically all these firms are examining...
Material that the poker site gives them.
e.g. source code that may be 1% of the entire system...
While the production code...
Is not necesssarily the same as the source code examined.

(2)

The PriceWaterhouseCoopers thing is hilarious.
They are saying that material given to them by Paradise matched.
PWC is a dirty company...
They were consultants to most of the oligarchs in Eastern Europe...
That RAPED the economies of Russia and Ukraine.

(3)
Canadian Indian reservations our outside of Canadian law...
And have long been involved in every sort of underground activity.
To quote this as a reputable "Gaming Commission" is laughable.

(4)
The Pokerstar thing is the same deal as #1...
They certify RNG algorithm as acceptable.


The ONLY people that could certify...
Whether the site has the ability to cheat... or does in fact cheat...
Are the top inside engineers that run their Systems Department.

For Party Poker...
These people are all located in India...
Far beyond the reach of the law.

I have no idea why you are acting as if I insulted your mom.

I have just been pointing out:

(1) Poker sites are certainly much dirtier than regulated financial firms.
Dirtier than 90s Nasdaq dealer rigging, Enron, mutual fund fraud, boiler rooms

(2) A software system that services 10,000 or 100,000 players...
Is far too complex to be "certified clean" by a 3rd party.

I would assume that the online casino world...
Is comparable to 1950's Las Vegas in terms of law compliance/enforcement...
Where a casino would routinely bring in a card mechanic as needed.

Why would that stop me from playing?

The is a term for a guy like you... a mook.
That's it... and get a spell checker.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
By "always", I mean very often.

[/ QUOTE ]

With logic like that, it's no wonder that you will win every argument. Thank you, Mr. Clinton.

[ QUOTE ]

The x's were NOT 3,4,5,6's. They were rags.


[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, double unintended comedy here. 1) What would you classify as "rags" then, if not 3, 4, 5, and 6s?
2) If your Ace high flush lost to a lower flush, then I will agree with you. Online poker is rigged.

[RedManPlus]

From today's PC World...
Paypal under investigation by Justice Department...
For violating Patriot Act...
Which addresses "money laundering"...
And "know your customer"...
Among other things.

PayPal Cited For Patriot Act Violation (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110103,00.asp)

I know all about this...
Because my business, a US Broker-Dealer...
Is subject to the Patriot Act.

You cannot do business with offshore casinos...
Because there is no way to avoid "laundered funds"...
And it's may be impossible to find out who the REAL owners are...
As opposed to whores fronting and shilling the site.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[King_Striker]

[SoSo]

look you crettin, live play is somewhat weaker than online play, you play less hands live and your probably experiencing what is known as "variance", ur a [censored] cretin for thinking multibillion dollar poker skins would risk it by rigging the decks......as everybody is out to get them

in conclusion to this brief essay, your probably not very good but i hope you continue to beat those 35 hands an hour for 2bb.

[Khaos337]

1) A8 is NOT a good hand

2) Calling all-in's w/ AJ will not get you very far in this game.

maybe you should learn to play hold'em??

[silencee]

[ QUOTE ]
OMG you are such a dummy it's not even worth arguing with you. Those x's were CARDS, cards that did NOT make the straight flush for my opponent, just the flush. I don't remember, could have been J/images/graemlins/spade.gif7/images/graemlins/spade.gif3/images/graemlins/spade.gif6 and he had the 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you're the dummy. Do you not realize that you said you had the ace of spades?

[ QUOTE ]

Have A/images/graemlins/spade.gifA/images/graemlins/club.gif against A/images/graemlins/heart.gif2/images/graemlins/spade.gif

Flop A/images/graemlins/diamond.gifx/images/graemlins/spade.gifx/images/graemlins/spade.gif
Turn: x/images/graemlins/spade.gif River: x/images/graemlins/spade.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Smooth one. Go back to your crop circles and tin foil hats, my friend.

[squizie]

thats just stupid!!

First of all - don't start picking on my spelling and grammar errors - english is only my 3d language,certainly not a mother tongue for me...

I was amazed to see how many ppl defend the mighty online poker rooms,just by saying "Why would they risk their reputation?".

Explain,how come the same story happens to everyone - i also won in my 1st 2 weeks - went up from 25$ to 450$,got excellent hands,was winning and so on,.
Begginers luck?
Or am i just a poor fish,who was led to believe he is good?
So,over the last few days,i lost 200@ bucks with some of the most amazing beats i ever saw (i played 6000 hands on this site - VC poker,ok,it's not that much,but still it's something) and all of a sudden,those things started to happen in chains.

First - i have qq.
Guy behind me bets,i raise,he calls.
Everybody fold.
The flop is q99.
I made a full house.
I raise,he raises me,i go all in,he calls.
We reveal the cards,he has 66,only one small pair!!!
Why whould he raise and reraise me with this crap??
I smile,expecting the easy money.
Ok,have you guessed the turn and the river?
That's right,it's 66.

Few hands from now.
I get 10 10,i bet,2 more ppl call.
I get a flop of 2 5 10 unsuited.
I bet,one folds,the other reraises me.
I go all in,he calls,we reveal the cards.
What does he have?
A goddamn jk.
Why,why on earth you call an all in with this amazing crap???
Do you know the cards?
Of course - it's q and a and he makes the straight.

And more freakish,bad beats,like higher flushes,higher full houses,KK gets beat by 22, and so on.
So,a week ago,i was a pro,making money and pumping my balance and suddenly i am fish,surrenderring to ridiculous calls and improbable beats hand after hand?

I thought,that this is only VC poker,so i started to look in google for poker site reviews,found this forum and this thread by accident.I've also found the reviews on this site
http://www.flopturnriver.com/
and was shocked to see,how many say that those sites are rigged,giving very solid examples...
Do you know,what are the odds of the same guy getting an aa in a row 3 times?
Or for the fact,that ace always comes on flop and miraculously,there are always at least to player,who have an ace something,so the pot goes up.
After another amazing beat,some guy that just beat said in a chat,that an 89 is a best card on this site,cause it catches a straight like 50% of the times and i am beginning to see,he's right.
How's that not rigged???

It's just smashed my hopes of ever becoming a poker pro.If it is no more than a slot machine,how can improve or at least win,which is,of corse is my ultimate goal?

I don't know,what to do,with the rest of my balance.
Continue loosing it to cheating site or cash out?
Tell me,all you pros,who constanly making money online,tell me about sites,where you do it.
And please,don't be a shills working for those sites.


We really need to spread the word about those sites,making them think twice,before rigging the games for rakes and posting shills to win our money!
I want to play online,i think,i can become a decent player,but i need to know,i am playing random shuffled cards and not some preprogrammed sequences for saps.

All i can say is this - sometimes the paranoid IS being watched.

[King_Striker]

I looked in the dictionary,but didn't find it.
What's a bowman? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Actually,i just remembered,that the player who got me with that a q,was crushed few hands before with an excellent hand also by some crap and he said in that chat,that this is amazing and blablabla.
So,perhaps,not all bad beats are done by shills,but still - it almost feels like the hands are programmed ahead,so that a few players get a strong,or that a certain player will win,no matter what.
I think,after a while,i'll be able to pick up those patterns myself,but - will it be called poker?

It's like someone said earlier in a thread - you have a 50/50 chance with every hand - whether they programmed you to be a hand winner or not.

The funny thing is that VCpoker posted on their site the explanation of their random generator,but - either they've done a very poor job on it or they are big fat liars.

[King_Striker]

I would gladly join you,except,i live in Israel,which is kind of far away /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[King_Striker]

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
OMG you are such a dummy it's not even worth arguing with you. Those x's were CARDS, cards that did NOT make the straight flush for my opponent, just the flush. I don't remember, could have been J/images/graemlins/spade.gif7/images/graemlins/spade.gif3/images/graemlins/spade.gif6 and he had the 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

If it's a simple typo, why do you have to go around calling people dummies? You're the one not worth arguing with.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]

Due to technical problems your tournament has been cancelled. Your buy in has been refunded to you

I know this is only a $1 tourney, but what about all the other tourneys? The $10, $20, $50 and $100 Buy-Ins? What about all the players that got eliminated? Does the site get to keep their money without honoring the price pool?

Does anyone have an explanation here besides the fact that it is a mean to make extra $?

[/ QUOTE ]

How would they be making money if they refund the buy-ins?

[King_Striker]

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Well... 50 players in, 10 players remainning, tourney got cancelled. They refund the 10 players and keep the other 40's money. Who have been eliminated and have no idea regarding the cancellation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. Normally I've seen sites split up the remaining money amongst the players who are still in, but apparantely they didn't do that this time?

[PhatPots]

Well stockman, you have convinced me. I am quitting online poker for good. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

*Whispers* Now we will get rid of all the good players and we can dominate. Brilliant!

Pots

[primetime32]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all - don't start picking on my spelling and grammar errors - english is only my 3d language,certainly not a mother tongue for me...

I was amazed to see how many ppl defend the mighty online poker rooms,just by saying "Why would they risk their reputation?".

Explain,how come the same story happens to everyone - i also won in my 1st 2 weeks - went up from 25$ to 450$,got excellent hands,was winning and so on,.
Begginers luck?
Or am i just a poor fish,who was led to believe he is good?
So,over the last few days,i lost 200@ bucks with some of the most amazing beats i ever saw (i played 6000 hands on this site - VC poker,ok,it's not that much,but still it's something) and all of a sudden,those things started to happen in chains.

First - i have qq.
Guy behind me bets,i raise,he calls.
Everybody fold.
The flop is q99.
I made a full house.
I raise,he raises me,i go all in,he calls.
We reveal the cards,he has 66,only one small pair!!!
Why whould he raise and reraise me with this crap??
I smile,expecting the easy money.
Ok,have you guessed the turn and the river?
That's right,it's 66.

Few hands from now.
I get 10 10,i bet,2 more ppl call.
I get a flop of 2 5 10 unsuited.
I bet,one folds,the other reraises me.
I go all in,he calls,we reveal the cards.
What does he have?
A goddamn jk.
Why,why on earth you call an all in with this amazing crap???
Do you know the cards?
Of course - it's q and a and he makes the straight.

And more freakish,bad beats,like higher flushes,higher full houses,KK gets beat by 22, and so on.
So,a week ago,i was a pro,making money and pumping my balance and suddenly i am fish,surrenderring to ridiculous calls and improbable beats hand after hand?

I thought,that this is only VC poker,so i started to look in google for poker site reviews,found this forum and this thread by accident.I've also found the reviews on this site
http://www.flopturnriver.com/
and was shocked to see,how many say that those sites are rigged,giving very solid examples...
Do you know,what are the odds of the same guy getting an aa in a row 3 times?
Or for the fact,that ace always comes on flop and miraculously,there are always at least to player,who have an ace something,so the pot goes up.
After another amazing beat,some guy that just beat said in a chat,that an 89 is a best card on this site,cause it catches a straight like 50% of the times and i am beginning to see,he's right.
How's that not rigged???

It's just smashed my hopes of ever becoming a poker pro.If it is no more than a slot machine,how can improve or at least win,which is,of corse is my ultimate goal?

I don't know,what to do,with the rest of my balance.
Continue loosing it to cheating site or cash out?
Tell me,all you pros,who constanly making money online,tell me about sites,where you do it.
And please,don't be a shills working for those sites.


We really need to spread the word about those sites,making them think twice,before rigging the games for rakes and posting shills to win our money!
I want to play online,i think,i can become a decent player,but i need to know,i am playing random shuffled cards and not some preprogrammed sequences for saps.

All i can say is this - sometimes the paranoid IS being watched.

[/ QUOTE ]

None of those hands actually happened. If they did you should post the real hand history and not your made up version of what happened. I am sure you will say that you can't get the hand history now. but if that really happened i am sure you would have saved it.

Lol.
Ye,i am lying.
What is my purpose,you ask?
To convince you all,that the sites are rigged?
Then,isn't THAT a conspirasy paranoidal thought?
I'll have the history,will find it and post it here for you...

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
Something amazing happened today I noticed. I was playing at the $1+.10 Buy in (just for fun and maybe win $15 top price). And right when I was in 6th and with 12 players out of 50 remainning, I received an error message saying:

Due to technical problems your tournament has been cancelled. Your buy in has been refunded to you

I know this is only a $1 tourney, but what about all the other tourneys? The $10, $20, $50 and $100 Buy-Ins? What about all the players that got eliminated? Does the site get to keep their money without honoring the price pool?

Does anyone have an explanation here besides the fact that it is a mean to make extra $?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the stupidest rigged theory i've ever heard. If sites did this on a regular basis, they would lose all their players. If this happened to me twice at one site I would never play tourneys there again.

You ppl make it sound like you get super suckouts every hand. If sites were actually doing this they would lose lots of ppl. There have to bee ppl that are winning and staying around. The whole idea of a casino is that they have a small edge over many random events. The main purpose of this is so that ppl dont lose their money too fast. If ppl lose their money really fast they wont come back. So if rigged sites go too far ppl will leave, and they lose there guaranteed millions. It has absolutely nothing to do with them getting caught or not. People like you are never coming back, thats money they are losing. People like you are posting to msg boards and scaring off potential customers. Sites are already losing business, why would they want to promote this trend for some extra short term profit.

Think about how many millions of hands get dealt a day online. Somebody some where is going to get a huge streak of suckouts. What are they going to do? They are going to come on the internet with their 'proof' of how the sites are rigged. If sites are rigged why are there so many ppl making a living from online poker. Its so stupid.

[Mike Cuneo]

[ QUOTE ]
Before you lose your whole roll

[/ QUOTE ]

Why didn't you stop playing before you lost your whole roll then if it's so rigged? Besides, someone has to win. It's not like everyone just breaks even and the house eventually takes all the money via rake. People do win consistently.

Also, I had a bad beat recently when someone hit a 2 outer vs me in live play. Does this mean live play is rigged too? Remember, you see a lot more hands online than you do live.

[King_Striker]

[King_Striker]

[ianlippert]

Please post your hand number so we can actually check it out. Last time someone posted their 'amazing' hand, somebody else looked it up and found out the guy was lying. Even if this happened to you one hand, you make it sound like it happens to you all the time. Runner-runner happens in poker. The most you can lose is you buy-in, if you are properly bankrolled they would have to do it to you several times in a row for you to lose everything. I really doubt that happend. Please show me 5 runner-runners that happened to you in the space of a month.

Online casinos dont profit in the long term from this kind of action. Sure they take your tiny $500 bankroll, but you are never coming back. If they take it from you in small chunk they could easily take several thousand off of you over a couple of years.

If you really think its rigged stop playing, or play limit.

[AgentBishop]

You know this damn thread has caused me to do a few hours of searching online in regards to rigged online poker. I have come to the conclusion that I want my few hours back! after the first hour it was all VERY repetitive.

After finding several new forums, some of which are pretty cool, they all had the EXACT same conversations. i.e.

Fish:
Online poker is rigged! look at this hand (insert EXAMPLE hand here. one with no id or table number.) see that's ridiculous.

Rational Human Being:
It's not rigged!

Fish:
Yes it is, see!(insert example hand here) This just doesn't happen as much live!

RHB:
Of course not! You play WAY more hands online! No its not RIGGED! We have statistical proof. Thousands and thousands of hands analyzed by thousands of people just looking to find an online site cheating. They find no error in hand distribution.

Fish:
I don't want to hear what you are saying so I will ignore the "statistical evidence." I got this hand in my memory that says otherwise. They want my $500 bankroll! RIGGED!

RHB:
These companies are cash cows that make hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars a year on the rake. They wouldn't risk getting exposed, and you can bet their competition is looking, for your little 3 figure bank roll. Not to mention that if everyone loses so fast they will leave and the money will dry up from no players.

Fish:
Why would they stop at an indefinite 100 million a year when they can steal your money and make 150 million for a couple years! THEY ARE GREEDY THIEVES! Look at this hand (insert another made up example hand here) SEE! RIGGED!

RHB:
They have data from their random number generators that are test and analyzed by a reputable third party company. They analyze months and months of data from ALL tables as well as what is happening at the table now to verify it to be random an unbiased.

Fish:
You haven't proven anything to me. That third party company is a liar. Party paid them 10k dollars to risk their reputation. All I know is that I have short term results showing really bad beats. I swear I am a successful live player and got that conclusion by examining my short term results over and over again and multiplying it out to a 500k hand database. So you see it's RIGGED! Don't lose your whole roll in one table like I did!

RHB:
It's not rigged! We have given you hard data to prove it. We have given you reasons why it's illogical financially for them to do it. You won't listen to reason!

This is essentially the same argument on all other forums I visited in this monumental waste of time I could have been playing ONLINE! This is such -EV!! if the fish even knows what that means.

[AgentBishop]

I'll tell you what King Striker. If you want I'll let you use my pattern mapper. If you set it up right you should be able to predict if you are likely to get sucked out or not. This thread should help you out on everything you need. Pattern Mapper! (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=498421&page=&view=&sb=5&o =&fpart=2&vc=1)

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow you make it so sound like the online pokerrooms are experts in business theories and 100% legitimate. No gambling business is legitimate. They rig occasionally to take in entire bankrolls of suckers they know will keep on playing. Why shouldn't they rig with all the new customers joinning in every day?

[/ QUOTE ]

You haven't answered this question yet: Why would they rig it when the cards themselves deal out enough bad beats on their own and generate enough action on their own?

[Mike Cuneo]

Hand history?

[King_Striker]

[Mike Cuneo]

Can we please see a hand history and some of your stats?

[King_Striker]

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
I have already answered to that. It's not about the "action". They occasionally have shills/bot play at tables. That is when they actually control the cards being delt. The reason: To take your entire bankroll, to win pots for the house.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would they do that, when they can take your bankroll legally and risk free while you generate more action for them later. Do you really think your $1000 on one hand is going to make a dent in their $1 million per day? You underestimate the rake.

[Beavis68]

so, they take your play money to sell it on EBAY?

[Mike Cuneo]

You are a joke. Please stop posting, it makes me dumber every time I read anything you write.

[DireWolf]

[ QUOTE ]
You are a joke. Please stop posting, it makes me dumber every time I read anything you write.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. He has been very helpful. He taught me that 4 of a kind was called a yacht. Thank you kind Sir /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I wouldnt call hitting kings over and then going all in playing poorly. But I would call the fact that my ONLY opponent called with queen four, and then hit runner runner runner queen to beat me, rigged.

Oh yeah, I play one table at a time, meaning the same number of hands, only faster. One deck, one table, same as live. Its not a conspiracy either, its OPTIMIZED FOR MAXIMUM PROFIT.

Yes indeed, it is the headsup losses that are the ones that convince me. Im holding kings over, and my opponent hits river river river queens for quads? I flop the nut flush, my opponent with jack four hits four, runner runner jack to beat me? Over and over again? I really doubt it.

Hmmm, I saved a shitload of my bad beats. I also requested my hand history, which the site should be able to provide considering they [censored] me up the ass all the time. If they would give me my hand history, I could learn the patterns and prove the [censored] is rigged, but alas, they say they cant do it.
Unfortunately, it took around 100 brutal beats before I realized I could save the hands. Yeah I know, why do you still play after all these bad beats, well, I just figured my playing was poor and I wanted to learn, small stakes. Now I know my playing was NOT that bad, and I was seeing FAR too many miracle 2% river cards for my liking. All I want is a 100% random deal and flop. They say it is unpredictable, which is probably true, but that doesnt mean its 100% random.

Seat 1: mercury51 ($925 in chips)
Seat 2: wjmkam ($2,935 in chips)
Seat 3: SuperLv ($1,600 in chips)
Seat 4: stoneagekyus [QD,AD] ($1,195 in chips)
Seat 5: yogash9 ($1,905 in chips)
Seat 6: jout ($3,680 in chips)
Seat 7: MVG123 ($895 in chips)
Seat 8: happyjack101 ($2,720 in chips)
Seat 9: Warlord66 ($925 in chips)
Seat 10: liltimmytee ($1,180 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
MVG123 posts blind ($15), happyjack101 posts blind ($30).

PRE-FLOP
Warlord66 folds, liltimmytee calls $30, mercury51 folds, wjmkam calls $30, SuperLv folds, stoneagekyus bets $200, yogash9 folds, jout folds, MVG123 folds, happyjack101 folds, liltimmytee calls $170, wjmkam calls $170.

FLOP [board cards 2C,9S,QS ]
liltimmytee checks, wjmkam bets $375, stoneagekyus bets $995 and is all-in, liltimmytee calls $980 and is all-in, wjmkam calls $620.

TURN [board cards 2C,9S,QS,10S ]


RIVER [board cards 2C,9S,QS,10S,7C ]


SHOWDOWN
stoneagekyus shows [ QD,AD ]
liltimmytee shows [ KC,QC ]
wjmkam shows [ 10C,9H ]
wjmkam wins $30, wjmkam wins $3,585.
SUMMARY
Dealer: jout
Pot: $3,615
mercury51, loses $0
wjmkam, bets $1,195, collects $3,615, net $2,420
SuperLv, loses $0
stoneagekyus, loses $1,195
yogash9, loses $0
jout, loses $0
MVG123, loses $15
happyjack101, loses $30
Warlord66, loses $0
liltimmytee, loses $1,180

Poker 4.0 Hand History
Hand number:
© PokerRoom.com Established 1999 About Us


Hmm, call my all in bet without high pair, then hit the very next card? For that matter, call my 200$ raise with 10-9? And you all say Im the bad player because I lose? HHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHHAA

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes indeed, it is the headsup losses that are the ones that convince me. Im holding kings over, and my opponent hits river river river queens for quads? I flop the nut flush, my opponent with jack four hits four, runner runner jack to beat me? Over and over again? I really doubt it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you keep track of the times your hand holds up?

Didn't think so.

Alright, this is one table at Poker Room. ONE DECK, ONE TABLE.
Here we go, you wanted proof, here it is.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,772,755
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:15 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,500 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,500 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($1,480 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($2,090 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,270 in chips)
Seat 6: Insider_1964 ($1,730 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($1,140 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [2S,QC] ($1,460 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,390 in chips)
Seat 10: NIUlax ($1,440 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
stoneagekyus posts blind ($10), rinkrat posts blind ($20).

PRE-FLOP
NIUlax folds, mtbhucker calls $20, Baner9588 folds, samboston calls $20, pokerdoggie calls $20, chasingtail folds, Insider_1964 folds, freeman628 folds, stoneagekyus folds, rinkrat checks.

FLOP [board cards 9S,AH,8C ]
rinkrat checks, mtbhucker checks, samboston checks, pokerdoggie checks.

TURN [board cards 9S,AH,8C,5S ]
rinkrat checks, mtbhucker bets $100, samboston folds, pokerdoggie calls $100, rinkrat folds.

RIVER [board cards 9S,AH,8C,5S,9H ]
mtbhucker checks, pokerdoggie bets $325, mtbhucker calls $325.

SHOWDOWN
pokerdoggie shows [ 5D,AS ]
mtbhucker mucks cards [ JH,JS ]
pokerdoggie wins $940.
SUMMARY
Dealer: freeman628
Pot: $940
mtbhucker, loses $445
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $20
pokerdoggie, bets $445, collects $940, net $495
chasingtail, loses $0
Insider_1964, loses $0
freeman628, loses $0
stoneagekyus, loses $10
rinkrat, loses $20
NIUlax, loses $0

Jacks dealt, ace hits on flop. EVERYTIME YOU GET A HALF DECENT POCKET PAIR, THERE IS AN OVERCARD ON THE FLOP.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,781,463
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:19 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($555 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,460 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($1,690 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($2,565 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,730 in chips)
Seat 6: Insider_1964 ($1,730 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($1,275 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [3C,2D] ($1,450 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,255 in chips)
Seat 10: NIUlax ($1,290 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
Baner9588 posts blind ($10), samboston posts blind ($20).

PRE-FLOP
pokerdoggie folds, chasingtail folds, Insider_1964 folds, freeman628 folds, stoneagekyus folds, rinkrat folds, NIUlax folds, mtbhucker calls $20, Baner9588 calls $10, samboston checks.

FLOP [board cards 9C,4D,5C ]
Baner9588 checks, samboston checks, mtbhucker checks.

TURN [board cards 9C,4D,5C,10C ]
Baner9588 bets $40, samboston folds, mtbhucker calls $40.

RIVER [board cards 9C,4D,5C,10C,QH ]
Baner9588 bets $125, mtbhucker bets $495 and is all-in, Baner9588 calls $370.

SHOWDOWN
mtbhucker shows [ KS,JD ]
Baner9588 shows [ 5D,5H ]
mtbhucker wins $1,130.
SUMMARY
Dealer: mtbhucker
Pot: $1,130
mtbhucker, bets $555, collects $1,130, net $575
Baner9588, loses $555
samboston, loses $20
pokerdoggie, loses $0
chasingtail, loses $0
Insider_1964, loses $0
freeman628, loses $0
stoneagekyus, loses $0
rinkrat, loses $0
NIUlax, loses $0

3 Players, trips hit, straight on runner runner BULLSHIT.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,783,463
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:20 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,130 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($905 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($1,670 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($2,565 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,730 in chips)
Seat 6: Insider_1964 ($1,730 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($1,275 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [JC,AH] ($1,450 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,255 in chips)
Seat 10: NIUlax ($1,290 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
samboston posts blind ($10), pokerdoggie posts blind ($20).

PRE-FLOP
chasingtail folds, Insider_1964 folds, freeman628 bets $100, stoneagekyus calls $100, rinkrat folds, NIUlax calls $100, mtbhucker folds, Baner9588 folds, samboston calls $90, pokerdoggie calls $80.

FLOP [board cards 5D,4S,9S ]
samboston checks, pokerdoggie checks, freeman628 bets $100, stoneagekyus folds, NIUlax bets $1,190 and is all-in, samboston folds, pokerdoggie folds, freeman628 calls $1,075 and is all-in.

TURN [board cards 5D,4S,9S,8S ]


RIVER [board cards 5D,4S,9S,8S,2H ]


SHOWDOWN
NIUlax shows [ 10H,10S ]
freeman628 shows [ AS,AD ]
NIUlax wins $15, freeman628 wins $2,850.
SUMMARY
Dealer: Baner9588
Pot: $2,865
mtbhucker, loses $0
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $100
pokerdoggie, loses $100
chasingtail, loses $0
Insider_1964, loses $0
freeman628, bets $1,275, collects $2,850, net $1,575
stoneagekyus, loses $100
rinkrat, loses $0
NIUlax, bets $1,290, collects $15, net -$1,275

My first playable hand, not the best, but playable, and I am third best. THIS IS THE FIRST HAND I COULD CALL ANY BETS ON, AND IM THIRD BEST. Right.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,789,773
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:24 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,130 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($905 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($1,570 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($2,630 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,700 in chips)
Seat 6: Insider_1964 ($1,700 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($2,760 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [3H,10C] ($1,350 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,255 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
chasingtail posts blind ($15), Insider_1964 posts blind ($30).

PRE-FLOP
freeman628 folds, stoneagekyus folds, rinkrat folds, mtbhucker folds, Baner9588 calls $30, samboston calls $30, pokerdoggie folds, chasingtail folds, Insider_1964 checks.

FLOP [board cards 6C,5D,5H ]
Insider_1964 checks, Baner9588 checks, samboston bets $50, Insider_1964 calls $50, Baner9588 folds.

TURN [board cards 6C,5D,5H,KS ]
Insider_1964 checks, samboston bets $125, Insider_1964 calls $125.

RIVER [board cards 6C,5D,5H,KS,9S ]
Insider_1964 checks, samboston bets $275, Insider_1964 bets $550, samboston bets $1,090 and is all-in, Insider_1964 bets $945 and is all-in.

SHOWDOWN
Insider_1964 shows [ 9H,9C ]
samboston shows [ 5S,5C ]
Insider_1964 wins $130, samboston wins $3,185.
SUMMARY
Dealer: pokerdoggie
Pot: $3,315
mtbhucker, loses $0
Baner9588, loses $30
samboston, bets $1,570, collects $3,185, net $1,615
pokerdoggie, loses $0
chasingtail, loses $15
Insider_1964, bets $1,700, collects $130, net -$1,570
freeman628, loses $0
stoneagekyus, loses $0
rinkrat, loses $0

This ones a beauty setup hand. 5s and 9s dealt, four fives on flop, third nine on river to make player think he has the hand won, SUPER BURN.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,793,076
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:25 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,130 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($875 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($3,185 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($2,630 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,685 in chips)
Seat 6: Insider_1964 ($130 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($2,760 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [6S,2H] ($1,350 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,255 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
Insider_1964 posts blind ($15), freeman628 posts blind ($30).

PRE-FLOP
stoneagekyus folds, rinkrat folds, mtbhucker folds, Baner9588 folds, samboston folds, pokerdoggie calls $30, chasingtail calls $30, Insider_1964 folds, freeman628 checks.

FLOP [board cards 9C,5C,JD ]
freeman628 checks, pokerdoggie bets $100, chasingtail folds, freeman628 bets $200, pokerdoggie calls $100.

TURN [board cards 9C,5C,JD,6C ]
freeman628 bets $200, pokerdoggie calls $200.

RIVER [board cards 9C,5C,JD,6C,AC ]
freeman628 bets $150, pokerdoggie calls $150.

SHOWDOWN
freeman628 shows [ 5H,5D ]
pokerdoggie mucks cards [ AH,JS ]
freeman628 wins $1,205.
SUMMARY
Dealer: chasingtail
Pot: $1,205
mtbhucker, loses $0
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $0
pokerdoggie, loses $580
chasingtail, loses $30
Insider_1964, loses $15
freeman628, bets $580, collects $1,205, net $625
stoneagekyus, loses $0
rinkrat, loses $0

Heres another prime setup hand, guy hits two large pairs, only to see he is betting dead against hidden trips.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,811,809
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:33 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,390 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,145 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($3,025 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($890 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,735 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($4,770 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [KC,QC] ($1,260 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($785 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
freeman628 posts blind ($50).

PRE-FLOP
stoneagekyus calls $50, rinkrat folds, mtbhucker folds, Baner9588 folds, samboston folds, pokerdoggie folds, chasingtail folds, freeman628 checks.

FLOP [board cards 9D,10D,7D ]
freeman628 bets $50, stoneagekyus folds.

SHOWDOWN
freeman628 wins $150.
SUMMARY
Dealer: chasingtail
Pot: $150
mtbhucker, loses $0
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $0
pokerdoggie, loses $0
chasingtail, loses $0
freeman628, bets $100, collects $150, net $50
stoneagekyus, loses $50
rinkrat, loses $0

This one is one that occurs about 80% of the time I get a suited hand at poker room. The flop is completely the other color and suited as well. Suited flops here occur once every 5 flops. BULLSHIT.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,812,991
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:34 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,390 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,145 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($3,025 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($890 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,735 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($4,820 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [KH,4H] ($1,210 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($785 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
freeman628 posts blind ($25), stoneagekyus posts blind ($50).

PRE-FLOP
rinkrat folds, mtbhucker calls $50, Baner9588 folds, samboston folds, pokerdoggie calls $50, chasingtail folds, freeman628 calls $25, stoneagekyus checks.

FLOP [board cards QH,5H,KD ]
freeman628 checks, stoneagekyus checks, mtbhucker checks, pokerdoggie checks.

TURN [board cards QH,5H,KD,6H ]
freeman628 checks, stoneagekyus bets $100, mtbhucker calls $100, pokerdoggie folds, freeman628 folds.

RIVER [board cards QH,5H,KD,6H,QS ]
stoneagekyus bets $200, mtbhucker calls $200.

SHOWDOWN
stoneagekyus shows [ KH,4H ]
mtbhucker mucks cards [ KC,6C ]
stoneagekyus wins $800.
SUMMARY
Dealer: chasingtail
Pot: $800
mtbhucker, loses $350
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $0
pokerdoggie, loses $50
chasingtail, loses $0
freeman628, loses $50
stoneagekyus, bets $350, collects $800, net $450
rinkrat, loses $0

Here is one where my ONLY opponent hits two pairs and I get lucky and hit the flush. Prime setup hand for me. Note that he hits two pairs with the six of hearts, which is what filled out my flush. Of course.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,815,420
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:36 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,040 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,145 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($3,025 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($840 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,735 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($4,770 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [8D,10C] ($1,660 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($785 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
stoneagekyus posts blind ($25), rinkrat posts blind ($50).

PRE-FLOP
mtbhucker calls $50, Baner9588 folds, samboston folds, pokerdoggie folds, chasingtail folds, freeman628 bets $100, stoneagekyus folds, rinkrat calls $50, mtbhucker calls $50.

FLOP [board cards 10S,KH,KS ]
rinkrat checks, mtbhucker bets $100, freeman628 bets $200, rinkrat bets $685 and is all-in, mtbhucker folds, freeman628 folds.

SHOWDOWN
rinkrat wins $1,310.
SUMMARY
Dealer: freeman628
Pot: $1,310
mtbhucker, loses $200
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $0
pokerdoggie, loses $0
chasingtail, loses $0
freeman628, loses $300
stoneagekyus, loses $25
rinkrat, bets $785, collects $1,310, net $525

THis hand is a good one too. I hit, seems the only times I hit, someone else hits at the same time. And even if they are the only ones IM against, they hit. Luckily I didnt play this hand.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,821,040
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:38 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,315 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,095 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($3,025 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($690 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,635 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($4,420 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [10D,10S] ($1,635 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,185 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
Baner9588 posts blind ($25), samboston posts blind ($50).

PRE-FLOP
pokerdoggie calls $50, chasingtail folds, freeman628 folds, stoneagekyus bets $150, rinkrat folds, mtbhucker calls $150, Baner9588 folds, samboston calls $100, pokerdoggie bets $640 and is all-in, stoneagekyus calls $540, mtbhucker folds, samboston folds.

FLOP [board cards JD,5S,5D ]


TURN [board cards JD,5S,5D,8D ]


RIVER [board cards JD,5S,5D,8D,AH ]


SHOWDOWN
pokerdoggie shows [ AS,7S ]
stoneagekyus shows [ 10D,10S ]
pokerdoggie wins $1,705.
SUMMARY
Dealer: mtbhucker
Pot: $1,705
mtbhucker, loses $150
Baner9588, loses $25
samboston, loses $150
pokerdoggie, bets $690, collects $1,705, net $1,015
chasingtail, loses $0
freeman628, loses $0
stoneagekyus, loses $690
rinkrat, loses $0

This one [censored] me totally. As you can see, weak assed player goes all in with ace seven. I MAKE THE CORRECT PLAY AND CALL, I HAVE THE BEST HAND. BY THE TIME THE RIVER COMES AROUND, HE HAS A 5% CHANCE. GUESS WHAT. AT THE MOST, 3 OUTS, maybe less. WHAT A [censored] SURPRISE, I MAKE THE CORRECT PLAY, HAVE THIS CLOWN ELIMINATED, AND HE HITS HIS 5% RIVER. THIS HAPPENS TO ME AT LEAST ONCE A TABLE. AND DONT SAY I SHOULDNT PLAY 10s BECAUSE I HAD THIS TURD EMBARRASSED.

No-limit Texas Hold'em $5+$1 (real money), hand #1,015,823,052
Bellaire Single Table Tournament, 25 Jun 2005 01:40 AM
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: mtbhucker ($1,165 in chips)
Seat 2: Baner9588 ($1,070 in chips)
Seat 3: samboston ($2,875 in chips)
Seat 4: pokerdoggie ($1,705 in chips)
Seat 5: chasingtail ($1,635 in chips)
Seat 7: freeman628 ($4,420 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [4C,JC] ($945 in chips)
Seat 9: rinkrat ($1,185 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
samboston posts blind ($25), pokerdoggie posts blind ($50).

PRE-FLOP
chasingtail folds, freeman628 folds, stoneagekyus calls $50, rinkrat bets $125, mtbhucker folds, Baner9588 folds, samboston folds, pokerdoggie calls $75, stoneagekyus calls $75.

FLOP [board cards JH,3D,QC ]
pokerdoggie checks, stoneagekyus checks, rinkrat bets $220, pokerdoggie folds, stoneagekyus bets $820 and is all-in, rinkrat calls $600.

TURN [board cards JH,3D,QC,QD ]


RIVER [board cards JH,3D,QC,QD,10D ]


SHOWDOWN
stoneagekyus shows [ 4C,JC ]
rinkrat shows [ AH,AS ]
rinkrat wins $2,040.
SUMMARY
Dealer: Baner9588
Pot: $2,040
mtbhucker, loses $0
Baner9588, loses $0
samboston, loses $25
pokerdoggie, loses $125
chasingtail, loses $0
freeman628, loses $0
stoneagekyus, loses $945
rinkrat, bets $945, collects $2,040, net $1,095

THis was my last hand at this table. I was slighty still hurting from the bullshit hand before, so I said hell, I cant win with good hands, ill try this one. Well, lo and behold, I hit jacks on the flop. Second best pair, but christ, I just finished getting [censored] so hard, I figured hell, Ill do what thousands do and win. I was correct in assuming my opponent had no queen, but, obviously, he had me beat from the beginning. My beef is not losing here, my beef is hitting once again when IM ALREADY BEAT. I FIGURED THIS GUY FOR ACE KING OR A POCKET PAIR. I FIGURE hell what are the chances my ONLY opponent has me beat again. Well [censored], bad play by me, but what the [censored].

Ok, so this was ONE TABLE, ONE DECK. TEN HANDS THAT PLAYED OUT TO THE END, with some wacky [censored] happening. This does NOT include the hands that did not get to the river. Some of the hands I didnt include because they were regular high pair wins hands. There was maybe 3 of those.

I played 4 hands, hit a flush and won, pocket tens get rivered on a LARGE BET. Jack four hits jacks on flop, someone with pocket aces. Ace jack dealt, I was THIRD BEST.
Ok so jack four was not so good, the other three were pretty good, and two of em lost. I would ascertain that 75% of these hands I play, lose. Notice that when I make a larger bet, something VERY UNLIKELY happens so I lose.
Now, Im not saying this happens against JUST ME, but EVERYONE at the table. Thus, I believe the hands are either pre determined, or the hole cards are dealt, and then based on who stays and folds, the flop is determined.
I cant say I care if you think Im nuts or not, but I knew going into this table that I would have a few nice hands to show here.
The table I played before this one, there were four of us left, one got pocket 8s, one got ace king, and i got ace king suited. We went all in and the 8s held on. When poker room tables get down too 3 or 4, THESE HANDS ARE DEALT CONTINUOUSLY. YOU FIGURE IT OUT. This table was NOT complete when I was ousted. So, WHO KNOWS HOW MANY MORE BS HANDS HAPPENED AT THIS TABLE. Its not rigged though, right?

[niin]

Definitive proof that online poker is rigged against YOU.

Since, we all know that the site has all the motivation in the world to take your money in a $5 buy-in tournament.

Well done. You've proven what nobody else could.

[RedManPlus]

AgentBishop Leader of the Mooks,

Please consider having the steel plate in your head removed.

It's well worth it...
To have your critical thinking faculties restored.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[AgentBishop]

[ QUOTE ]
AgentBishop Leader of the Mooks,

Please consider having the steel plate in your head removed.

It's well worth it...
To have your critical thinking faculties restored.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

But the plate helps enhance my pattern mapper! sheesh!





loser

[a500lbgorilla]

Explain to me again, why do they rig sit and goes?

[jedi]

Wow. If this is indicative of the play at Poker Room, I've been fishing at the wrong spot.

Nothing here but bad play over and over again.

You pay a fee , if you are eliminated, you need to pay another fee to sit at another table. Pretty simple.

Im curious as to whether or not you can read?

No-limit Texas Hold'em $0+$0 (real money), hand #1,020,683,317
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: sippybluff ($4,410 in chips)
Seat 2: mjones4580 ($1,125 in chips)
Seat 3: Aces8s04 ($1,975 in chips)
Seat 4: The River4 ($980 in chips)
Seat 5: CCP ($1,095 in chips)
Seat 6: ANJBerg ($2,305 in chips)
Seat 7: lockster23 ($1,963 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [10D,JD] ($1,675 in chips)
Seat 9: tom brady1 ($3,212 in chips)
Seat 10: falcon X1 ($1,155 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
lockster23 posts blind ($50), stoneagekyus posts blind ($100).

PRE-FLOP
tom brady1 folds, falcon X1 folds, sippybluff calls $100, mjones4580 folds, Aces8s04 folds, The River4 calls $100, CCP folds, ANJBerg folds, lockster23 folds, stoneagekyus checks.

FLOP [board cards 4C,5C,10S ]
stoneagekyus bets $100, sippybluff bets $1,700, The River4 folds, stoneagekyus calls $1,475 and is all-in.

TURN [board cards 4C,5C,10S,6D ]


RIVER [board cards 4C,5C,10S,6D,7S ]


SHOWDOWN
sippybluff shows [ 3C,2C ]
stoneagekyus shows [ 10D,JD ]
sippybluff wins $125, sippybluff wins $3,500.
SUMMARY
Dealer: ANJBerg
Pot: $3,625
sippybluff, bets $1,800, collects $3,625, net $1,825
mjones4580, loses $0
Aces8s04, loses $0
The River4, loses $100
CCP, loses $0
ANJBerg, loses $0
lockster23, loses $50
stoneagekyus, loses $1,675
tom brady1, loses $0
falcon X1, loses $0

This guy plays 2-3 of clubs, then hits for a straight flush draw on the flop. Now I dunno about you, but I have my doubts about this one. Then, he pushes me all in, with ONLY a draw, and hits his very next card. If he had done this in a live game, he would have been laughed out of the room.
LOL.

[silencee]

[ QUOTE ]
No-limit Texas Hold'em $0+$0 (real money), hand #1,020,683,317
View Previous | Next hand for this table.
Seat 1: sippybluff ($4,410 in chips)
Seat 2: mjones4580 ($1,125 in chips)
Seat 3: Aces8s04 ($1,975 in chips)
Seat 4: The River4 ($980 in chips)
Seat 5: CCP ($1,095 in chips)
Seat 6: ANJBerg ($2,305 in chips)
Seat 7: lockster23 ($1,963 in chips)
Seat 8: stoneagekyus [10D,JD] ($1,675 in chips)
Seat 9: tom brady1 ($3,212 in chips)
Seat 10: falcon X1 ($1,155 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
lockster23 posts blind ($50), stoneagekyus posts blind ($100).

PRE-FLOP
tom brady1 folds, falcon X1 folds, sippybluff calls $100, mjones4580 folds, Aces8s04 folds, The River4 calls $100, CCP folds, ANJBerg folds, lockster23 folds, stoneagekyus checks.

FLOP [board cards 4C,5C,10S ]
stoneagekyus bets $100, sippybluff bets $1,700, The River4 folds, stoneagekyus calls $1,475 and is all-in.

TURN [board cards 4C,5C,10S,6D ]


RIVER [board cards 4C,5C,10S,6D,7S ]


SHOWDOWN
sippybluff shows [ 3C,2C ]
stoneagekyus shows [ 10D,JD ]
sippybluff wins $125, sippybluff wins $3,500.
SUMMARY
Dealer: ANJBerg
Pot: $3,625
sippybluff, bets $1,800, collects $3,625, net $1,825
mjones4580, loses $0
Aces8s04, loses $0
The River4, loses $100
CCP, loses $0
ANJBerg, loses $0
lockster23, loses $50
stoneagekyus, loses $1,675
tom brady1, loses $0
falcon X1, loses $0

This guy plays 2-3 of clubs, then hits for a straight flush draw on the flop. Now I dunno about you, but I have my doubts about this one. Then, he pushes me all in, with ONLY a draw, and hits his very next card. If he had done this in a live game, he would have been laughed out of the room.
LOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually with a draw like that he was the favorite after the flop. This is absolutely nothing special.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Anything to back up your claim as me being the "fish"?

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread, and your responses within it.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
You pay a fee , if you are eliminated, you need to pay another fee to sit at another table. Pretty simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

SnGs don't go on forever you know. Everyone gets eliminated at some point. Even the winner has to pay another fee to sit at another table. So the question still stands.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
If he had done this in a live game, he would have been laughed out of the room.
LOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[tonypaladino]

[ QUOTE ]
No-limit Texas Hold'em $0+$0 (real money), hand #1,020,683,317"

[/ QUOTE ]

So was this a freeroll tourney?
--> Freeroll = Loose Playing

Or maybe you made a typo when making up HH's
--> You = Moron

[jman220]

These hands prove beyond a shadow of a doubt... that you suck at poker. Seriously, many of them are not played well. (For instance your hand with pocket jacks, what are you doing calling that river bet?) Cruise these forums, read other people's posted hands, improve your play. Or just continue shouting inanely about online rigging, refusing to face the fact that your play is far from optimal, the choice is yours.

[a500lbgorilla]

[ QUOTE ]
You pay a fee , if you are eliminated, you need to pay another fee to sit at another table. Pretty simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

So then wouldn't they optimally want everyone to win? You pay a fee, if you win, you want to pay another fee to win again. So you pay another fee. Pretty simple.

Vrs, you lose, tilt, and quit.

[Mike Cuneo]

This thread is 10000000.01% rigged I just called Poker Stars and they told me it was true. Thankfully they told me the play money isn't rigged anymore so you can maybe go there and win.

[jman220]

They're stealing 5% of all of our pots, WTF is that!?! Its rigged so the dealer always wins 5 cents on every dollar in the pot, up to 3 dollars! Rigged!

[King_Striker]

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
lol.

what a dummy

[/ QUOTE ]
See "Attention King Striker" for appropriate response.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=2749122&page=0&view=colla psed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1

[King_Striker]

[jman220]

First of all, these kinds of things happen to us all. Second of all, if these kinds of things happen a lot on bowman's poker, than I really may have to give that site a try, just means they have fishier play than usual. Third of all, I really don't believe that its happening to you as much as you say it is, anyone can post hands, Ooh, I had a hand yesterday, I got deal the J/10 of Spades, flop came QKA of spades, turn came 2 of clubs, river came five of diamonds, the fish turned over joker/instruction card to drag the pot. Its meaningless unless you also post hand history numbers that we can independently verify, otherwise, I don't believe you that it happens to you every hand like you say id does, and neither do most others on this board.
Edit: Oh and finally, if you are so convinced that Bowman's poker is rigged, than you are ridiculously stupid for continuikng to play there. I have never even heard of Bowman's poker, it certainly has much less at stake than the larger poker sites, if you're so convinced its rigged, move your money to a larger site like party, pokerstars, UB, Paradise, which are huge, and would just have too much to lose by rigging the deck. Of course you won't do this, because you're an idiot, and you'll come up with some dumb response I'm sure.

[King_Striker]

[Georgia Avenue]

[ QUOTE ]
Ooh, I had a hand yesterday, I got deal the J/10 of Spades, flop came QKA of spades, turn came 2 of clubs, river came five of diamonds, the fish turned over joker/instruction card to drag the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn you instruction card! Gets me every time...
Funny as hell. Please keep baiting this donkey because I hate working!

[jman220]

Once again, if you think the site is rigged, you are an absolute moron for continuing to play there when there are so many sites that are so obviously not rigged, (All the big ones, like Party, Stars, Paradise, Absolute, UB, Prima, Cryptos, Pokerroom, etc. etc.). If you really believe that it is rigged, and you still play there, I just can't state enough how dumb that is.

[King_Striker]

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Google ---> "Party Poker rigged" nuff said

[/ QUOTE ]

Google ---> "Elvis is still alive"
Google ---> "UFO's are real"
Google ---> "The earth is flat"
Google ---> "Moon Landing was a hoax"
Google ---> "CIA assassinated JFK"
Google ---> "Hitler is still alive, living in Brazil"

What's your point?

[toots]

Hey, I can play too.

Google ---> "All your base"
Google ---> jopke

[Mike Cuneo]

[ QUOTE ]
Google ---> FISH!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[King_Striker]

[jedi]

If you really can't get hand histories from them, that's just evidence of a poorly run site, not of fraud. I don't know of any sites where you can't get hand histories automatically. Why do you have to email them?

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
That's Bowmans Poker. DO NOT PLAY WITH THESE FRAUDS! It's not Poker. I think I will sue these bastards for taking my money.

[/ QUOTE ]
And yet, YOU continue to play there. (Degenerate gambler much? Can't stay away from the sportsbook?) Play somewhere else. I've never even heard of Bowman's, I'm sure most others her haven't either, and I certainly know of no one else who plays there.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
That's Bowmans Poker. DO NOT PLAY WITH THESE FRAUDS! It's not Poker. I think I will sue these bastards for taking my money.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the name, what's your name on Bowmans?

[jdaddy]

iGlobalMedia (PartyPoker) IPO = $9 BILLION
I am sure they will risk that to take your $25 bankroll.

[King_Striker]

[TurboDollar]

I haven't read all the replies in this thread, but it seems to me that you are not thinking about the fact of who's playing online.
If you get into a table with only pro's, you will be telling another story. Most ppl playing online are rookies, or bad players lookin' for fun or quick money. That means they push almost every hand, or mostly "bad" hands to see the flop, cause they may catch their pair or trips. These so called "fishes" keep the big machinery going. You can meet them constantly on the low NL tables at for example Prima. Any pro hate playing these rookies, cause it is not possible to calculate what they are pushing. When I play big freerolls at Ladbrokes or another Primasite, I see it too often; AA/AK/KK/AQ/AJ/QQ get beaten by 87o/J8s (or similar) or a low pair, cause the rookie push it in, hoping for a trips or straight. (NOTE: It is still far much often these good hands beat the rookie!) This is not because it is rigged, but because you never can predict those players hands. Many pros get eliminated in big tourneys because of badbeats. Phil Ivey and other excellent players said before this years WSOP Main Event that it is a lottery, because it is so many participant. And among them a lot of amateurs and "rookies". I have played a lot live, and against a lot of rookies and experienced similar situations as I do online. Playing online demands completely different skills than playing live, and if you do not master this, you will get beaten.
I do not deny that some online sites may be rigged, but not the majority of them.

[deepdowntruth]

I know it's rigged. And how I know is that they spread the wins and losses out equally over all the players so that no one notices.

Indisputable.

[Zurvan]

[ QUOTE ]
I know it's rigged. And how I know is that they spread the wins and losses out equally over all the players so that no one notices.

Indisputable.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the dumbest thing in this thread. Which is saying something monumental.

Consider - if all the beats are distributed evenly, over everybody so that nobody notices... isn't it far more likely that random distribution of the cards is laying out those beats, instead of some horrendously complex system being set up to rig the cards? Not just rig them, but do it in such a way that it appears random?

Why do you people not think about things? Actually apply a little thought to the problem, and realize that maybe - MAYBE - the cards are totally random, and you are taking bad beats, just like the ones that happen in live play. People do stupid things with bad cards, and sometimes they get lucky. It happens.

I do not believe that any online card room is rigged. For many reasons that have been discussed ad nauseum. If you can present evidence to support the theory that they are rigged (and no amount of bad beats constitutes evidence) then I'm willing to change my mind.

Until then, quit whining about your beats.

[jman220]

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. And if not, dear god.

[ianlippert]

I dunno after this weekend I'm defiatnely convinced after this flop:

UTG raises with JJ, button calls with AK, BB calls with 66. What kind of flop did we get? A6J of course! OMFG! RIGGED!!!

oh wait I was the player with JJ, 23 BB. Thx Party Poker!

(yes this was a real hand)

[TurboDollar]

What is special about this flop???

[King_Striker]

[Offsprung]

Awesome bro! You're in win mode! Surely you should play for the next 24 hours and tell us about all the riches you unearth!

[Mike Cuneo]

[ QUOTE ]
And tommorow I will stay away from Poker since I will win a bundle on the Pedro Martinez game to go "Under".

[/ QUOTE ]

Watch out, I heard the umps are gonna rig the strike zone in that one.

[magiluke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Google ---> "Party Poker rigged" nuff said

[/ QUOTE ]

Google ---> "Elvis is still alive"
Google ---> "UFO's are real"
Google ---> "The earth is flat"
Google ---> "Moon Landing was a hoax"
Google ---> "CIA assassinated JFK"
Google ---> "Hitler is still alive, living in Brazil"

What's your point?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hehe, I typed in the last one (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Hitler+is+still+alive%2C+living+in+ Brazil&btnG=Google+Search), and check out the second hit.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Google ---> "Party Poker rigged" nuff said

[/ QUOTE ]

Google ---> "Elvis is still alive"
Google ---> "UFO's are real"
Google ---> "The earth is flat"
Google ---> "Moon Landing was a hoax"
Google ---> "CIA assassinated JFK"
Google ---> "Hitler is still alive, living in Brazil"

What's your point?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hehe, I typed in the last one (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Hitler+is+still+alive%2C+living+in+ Brazil&btnG=Google+Search), and check out the second hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL

[bdohaney]

Here are my thoughts on the subject, and most of it has been said by one person or another. I, personally am not sure of whether or not online poker is rigged. I am not one of the proponents who rant on how it has to be rigged, but those of them who are coherent, make one or two valid points.

1.) These online casinos are grossly under-regulated. They don't operate in the US, likely because they don't want to be regulated. There should be nothing illegal about them operating from Nevada, and falling under the NGC... But, as far as I know, NOT ONE site falls under their tight jurisdiction. Major corporations that fall under a GREAT DEAL of regulation cheat on a regular basis, so... Why shouldn't these online sites cheat (still a slight fallacy, but bear with me)?

2.) There certainly can be a preponderance of bad beats online. BUT... This could just as easily be explained to being due to seeing a great deal more hands, with players who are a great deal more Aggressive and Loose.

The biggest problem people have proving their argument that online poker MAY (not must be) rigged is that they are not properly thinking through their arguments, and as such, their arguments end up being largely fallacious (some posters more than others.) Personally? I tried online poker for a bit. Didn't work out for me so much, so I am done with it (unless a site does come up that IS properly regulated.) While I am not insisting that it is rigged, I accept that it is a possibility. But, at the same time, I accept the possibility and responsibility that I could have possibly not been able to adjust to the looser, more aggressive, less skilled online poker. So, I am sticking with playing live, where "I" am comfortable playing.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
These online casinos are grossly under-regulated. They don't operate in the US, likely because they don't want to be regulated. There should be nothing illegal about them operating from Nevada, and falling under the NGC...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect.

[bdohaney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
These online casinos are grossly under-regulated. They don't operate in the US, likely because they don't want to be regulated. There should be nothing illegal about them operating from Nevada, and falling under the NGC...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you. I stand corrected. That being said, perhaps in that some fault lies. If the goverment were smart about it, they would legalize servers being ran in the US on a REGULATED basis, and then make their taxes off of it, as they do other US regulated gambling enterprises.

[RedManPlus]

Well said, bdohaney.

The shills are gonna sh*t themselves.
Don't you know that cheating is IMPOSSIBLE?

Also...
It's very difficult to get unbiased information...
About the state of US Gambling Laws regarding online casinos.

Industry magazine such as CardPlayer...
Constantly misrepresent the facts and trivialize the issue.

Here is a link to CardPlayer shilling...
And a response point by point.

US Gambling Laws Discussion (http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Articles-Notes/federal-law-cardrooms.htm)

Hey...
I'm pro online gambling...
But not at great social cost...
But not at the expense of the truth.

Remember...
For every Poker Pro strutting his stuff on TV...
There are 100 broken down losers and families.
It's a zero sum game.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Easy E]

They have to do regular maintenance, dontcha know... you didn't think those crashes were accidently, did you?

Also, they skim 0.001% off of everyone's account while they are "maintaining"

[devilsshadow]

/images/graemlins/blush.gif Wow...I'm not sure what to think about the folk who buy stockman's conclusion. At any rate, my personal opinion on this matter is as such: stockman is suffering from one of poker's oldest and deadliest diseases: TooMuchEgoItis

Granted, I don't have a whole lot of experience playing poker yet; however, if I have learned anything in my six month tenure, it is that experience can be very misleading.

When I first started playing, it was on common sense, or, so I though; and, I lost, a lot. I then read Larry Phillips, "The Tao of Poker," which I would suggest for any beginner as well as more experienced players looking for a good read and reminder of some of the most basic and important fundamentals in poker. After reading Phillips' piece, I began winning consistently; then, I ran into that deadly disease: TooMuchEgoItis

I began playing above my bankroll and lost my bankroll, online. Ironically, in much the same way that stockman describes - a few, and only few, really horrid beats in high stakes ring games - the most memorable (and the one beat that solidified my now winning formula and attitude -attitude being the most important part of the equation) - I lost a quarter of my bankroll on one hand - of course, that hand started with AA...and, after putting the lead bettor on a pair of tens with a flop of 2s-6c-10c following his gutless bet, I moved all in on the flop over the top of him with my overpair -THE CORRECT CALL NO LESS- after two minutes of deliberation...our spineless, not so bright, yet lucky villian called my all in with only 10s-Jc....the man has 2 outs with the tens and quite a few for the runner runner flush draw....well there would be no runner runner flush draw, but you know what did come? How about the 10 of diamonds AND the 10 of hearts for a runner runner QUAD DRAW to slam me into the twilight zone where I nearly puked.

BUT, the VALUABLE LESSON to be learned from that hand (and, regardless of what happens to you in life, no matter how bad it is, the least you MUST do is LEARN FROM IT); the VALUABLE LESSON, was simply a very stark reminder that, in poker, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. Go ahead, ask the REAL pros, not the grind it out wanna-be's like stockman, THE REAL PROS; and, they will concur, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN, and will happen at some point. That doesn't mean you're a bad player, it doesn't mean you're a good player; it simply means what simply cannot be denied - THERE ARE BILLIONS OF VERY REAL MATHEMATICAL POSSIBILITIES ON EVERY HAND, get used to it and get over it.

My story continues...

After the beat, I decided to mellow out for two weeks; I went out and picked up both Super System II along with Helmuth's new book; and, well, contrary to stockman's schizophrenic paranoid delusions, have been winning CONSISTENTLY, ONLINE, ever since. Granted, my high stakes and Doyle Brunson's high stakes are two different things at this point (until WSOP 2006 at least /images/graemlins/wink.gif ) BUT, the point is that players DO AND CAN WIN CONSISTENTLY ONLINE so long as they stick to the fundamentals and avoid the ever damaging and entirely FALSE belief that they cannot lose and/or are GOD...

Proof? Well....check out Jetsetpoker.com - unless I'm mistaken (correct me if I am) - Jetset is the only online site that ranks all of it's members based on their performance....Yearly, Monthly, and Weekly Tournament Leaderboard standings are there for your personal pleasure to see EXACTLY how you measure up against your opponents over the long run.

But hell, I'm sure my buddy over on Jetset, Dahmsy, currently number one on the yearly leaderboard, would gladly tell you that stockman is correct and that he finishes #1 every other month due to the fact he's lucky as hell - or, he might tell you that jetset likes him a lot - or, he might tell you that he's a shill -

or - he'd tell you stockman is full of fecal matter.

Peace, Good Luck, and Level Heads,


Sean

[King_Striker]

oh for f***s sake have you nothing better to do with your life. get a hobby. get a girlfriend. get a boyfriend. get both. let the wife watch. watch tv. go outside. get a friend. get therapy. JUST STOP WHINGING.

Thank you.

[Offsprung]

[ QUOTE ]
They use special cheat softwares with which they know everyone's cards and can control what cards will come out next.

[/ QUOTE ]

And only you are clever enough to see through their dark ways and counter them by... continuing to play with no advantage.

[King_Striker]

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]


I do avoid cash games and have limits that are only a fraction of what I play in real life. I won $75 last night as I was on "winning mode" after losing in the sportsbook. But now I shall stay away as Gold is coming in the sportsbook.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there is a full moon coming too, so you might want to update your tin foil hat. Remember, shiny side out.

[kasey2004]

[ QUOTE ]
No I am not the only one. Mind you I did not start this thread. There are about 28% of players convinced it's rigged.

I do avoid cash games and have limits that are only a fraction of what I play in real life. I won $75 last night as I was on "winning mode" after losing in the sportsbook. But now I shall stay away as Gold is coming in the sportsbook.

[/ QUOTE ]

where the hell do u get the # 28% ?

/images/graemlins/spade.gif Kasey /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[CallMeIshmael]

Do you think the sports book is fixed too?

[King_Striker]

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you think the sports book is fixed too?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not possible. Although I do think some games are fixed, like in the NBA, MLB, NFL. Definately some of the NFL games and there has been police investigation on it too. Lots of times I had spectacular wins/losses because of a certain game I thought was fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol, I think you're even losing credibility among the "online poker is rigged" crowd.

[King_Striker]

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't give a rat's ass. It's my opinion and you don't have to listen if you don't wanna.

Tell me, how often does a baseball game in which the wind blow out to center feild at 25 MPH in one of the biggest hitter's park have ZERO Home-Runs?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right. I bet Steinbrenner is on the payroll for Bowman's. Rigged!

[HandCracker]

dont be a sore loser.

[up4pokr]

I read something a couple months ago that made me realize that online poker is not rigged. The simple fact is sites like Party Poker make Billions a DAY! Do the math if you don't believe it... Do you really think that these sites care about keeping 5 bucks in the poor man's account when they are collecting rakes on 4500 tables every minute!! As far as the prop players, they make 100% of their rakes back and thats it. If the sites wanted more money they'd be paying 100% of the rake back to the prop players and making them lose all there big bets to keep other players playing. Anyone else agree?

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
I read something a couple months ago that made me realize that online poker is not rigged. The simple fact is sites like Party Poker make Billions a DAY! Do the math if you don't believe it... Do you really think that these sites care about keeping 5 bucks in the poor man's account when they are collecting rakes on 4500 tables every minute!! As far as the prop players, they make 100% of their rakes back and thats it. If the sites wanted more money they'd be paying 100% of the rake back to the prop players and making them lose all there big bets to keep other players playing. Anyone else agree?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not quite. But the rest of your post is valid.

Didn't read all of the replies so sorry if I'm repeating some old idea.

The basic idea about pokersites beeing rigged seems to be that newcomers get better cards to stay, guys withdrawing getting worse cards and pokersites having bots playing. This is what the guys beliving in rigged sites say.

The ones not beliving says pokersites will not risk their reputation and it doesn't matter for them who wins the pot. I belive this is true.

My idea, and what I would probably do if I was to rig a site (besides bots which are probably good), is to help the guys playing loose, especially making big loose calls since THAT will actually generate more rake for them because there will be much more big pots. To reward their behaivior would be a profitable thing for the site.

NO, I don't belive the most popular sites are rigged, I just find the conspiracy theories amusing and like to contribute. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[shermn27]

Lost $50 two nights ago playing like a loose-aggressive idiot on .50/1.00 6-max on party. RIGGED!

[xileh]

You guys I, as well as the e-book SECRETS PARTY POKER DOESN'T WANT TO YOU KNOW have cracked the internet poker code:

WLWWLLLWLLLLWLLWWWLLLWLLWLWLLLLWLLLLLLWLWLWWWLLWLL LLWLWLWLW

Don't spread this around though, we don't want too many people knowing e-poker secrets!

[naphand]

Never underestimate the power of denial.

The evidence is there, both from the research at PEARL and other sources. However, I fully realise that even if I provide references (which would take hours to put together) people will either (i) not read them, (ii) not understand the research or (iii) refuse to recognise the conclusions. I am not about to try and win an argument against those who will NEVER change their minds no matter what they see or hear. Those who want to form a more balanced opinion than the "deny all" approach of Randi and his utterly false "science" (it is not a coincidence that Randi is a trained magician - he is well used to duping the public), they will find the references and research for themselves. They do not have to look far, but they do have to dig a bit.

If you want to see how low he stoops his website contains refutations of some of the basic principles of quantum mechanics (apparently he is a "classical" physicists, lol). His organisations refusal to supply the sources of their data in the now infamous "mars effect" debate with Gauquelin and resulting humuliating expose should leave no-one in any doubt of his hypocrisy and double-standards. Genius? Don't make me laugh.

I am a trained biochemist (Dundee University) with a postgrad research degree (MSc.). I am well versed in scientific protocol and research etc. I spent a lot of time at University "studying" unified field theory physics and was struck by the strangely "non-scientific" ideas that were thrown up by quantum theory. If anything this has continued to develop over the years, with many physicists now openly questioning the rigid mechanistic philosophies prevalent for so long. The new physics theories (and I do not talk of quack "science" here) place consciousness at the centre of the structure of the universe, or at the very least in a position to affect its behaviour.

Not long ago scientists were dismissing "consciousness" as an epiphenomenon of no significance whatsoever. Some still maintain this view.

If consciousness does have a part to play in the Universe this will overturn centuries of scientific thinking. Of course there will be deniers and resistors. And of course there will always be crackpots and charlatans. This, however, does not justify the near-hysterical response many so-called scientists display when questioned on such matters as ESP. Hardly a "scientific attitude". The standard response "I have seen no evidence" is really quite laughable, as most not only have never looked, but refuse to look or consider the possibility.

There is far more to this than "science" versus "quacks". It is a shame most will never look into it closely enough to appreciate the enormous impact that research like this could have on our understanding of the universe. It is challenging, but total dismissal is not only incorrect it is also highly unscientific.

I posted as one who holds a different view. I know full well there are any number of idiots who know nothing of the research, know nothing about science, modern physics or consciousness studies who prefer to ridicule and be ignorant. They can keep their heads in the toilet bowl, I really care little for their ignorant and outdated attitudes and thinking. They are not the people pushing back the frontiers of scientific thinking.

Of course there is much that science has done and will do. As a method of researching the structure of the Universe on a "classical" level it is a practical and very thorough protocol. It has limitations, those limits may be set by the human mind or they may be extended beyond it. This remains to be seen, the story is not written yet.

If you want testimony, speak to the military.

NB
Seriously Al, what research have you read? How familiar are you with consciousness studies or the "new physics"? I could put some references together but I somehow doubt you would be prepared to consider the possibility of retracting your statement publicly. Why? Because that is how the vast majority of deniers behave. To accept anything remotely "mystical" is to invite the scorn and ridicule of the majority of the scientific community. The fact it is a majority has nothing to do with it, new ideas or theories always start as a minority. Good example, Dmitri Mendeleev inventor of the Periodic Table of Elements who was publicly scorned for his ideas but who was subsequently vindicated by the discovery of new elements which bahaved exactly as predicted (he was also not alone is his attempts to create such a table). What is even more apt is that his ideas (that elements could be grouped by atomic weight and show periodic properties) was incomplete and flawed and contained no scientific rationale for why it should be so. It was only years later with the discovery of atomic structure, that his ideas were fully validated.

Your focus on the discussion of cold-fusion and similar from "Margins of Reality" suggests you are avoiding the premise of the entire book, which was set out to investigate consciousness phenomena and and formulate a possible theoretical framework for further investigation (as well as discussing why current scientific ideoligies/techniques fail to do its study justice). You make no mention of the studies in the book supporting ideas such as "remote viewing" and "psychokinesis". Why not?

[oreogod]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone listens to Art Bell too much. Are there Shadow People too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome.

[seahawktd]

Studies have shown that poker players who don't tip, end up going on bad bad, very bad losing streaks....

I normally tip one buck every time I win a pot unless it's a blind steal or very small pot. But hell, if I win a $300 pot, I have no problem giving them an extra buck, especially if the dealer's hot, lol

[realwtf]

[ QUOTE ]
This poster is wrong, and so are you about Randi. James Randi is an idiot, several people have offered to take him on over the so-called offer for ESP but he has the habit of setting impossible-to-meet conditions (so I have heard). If you want proof of the existence of ESP speak to the Military regarding their "remote viewing" experiments (both in the USA and Soviet Union) or maybe just take a look at the results produced by the internationally respected PEAR Lab. at Princeton University (Princeton Engineering Anonmalies Research Laboratory). They have a website and some of the research and background is published in their book "Margins of Reality".

It is not a question of whether ESP exists or not, it exists and demonstrably so. The problem is (i) providing some kind of mechanism to explain it, which is necessary for any theory to have credence and (ii) finding out the practical uses and limitations.

Those who belong to the "there is no evidence" are basically the same as Randi "we refuse to listen, we refuse to see, so we refute (as we have neither seen or heard)". There is a huge and growing body of credible evidence if you would only bother to look (which you clearly have not). Sure there are any number of crackpots, but there are also a growing number of respected physicists and psychologist, surgeons etc. that now accept its existence both from experimental data and the substantial quantity of anecdotal and experiential evidence. If you refuse to believe it, you are a fool, the evidence is overwhelming. Oh well, I hope your flat-earth membership goes though ok...

[/ QUOTE ]

He sets up conditions because only frauds can do ESP. The scientific conditions eliminate the fraudsters.

Any real person with ESP could easly win one million. Since ESP is not real his one million is safe.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Any real person with ESP could easly win one million. Since ESP is not real his one million is safe.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any real person with ESP could easily win 7.5 million, See LINK: LINK (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=inet&Number=2885784&Forum= ,All_Forums,&Words=&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=288 4959&Search=true&where=&Name=60&daterange=&newerva l=&newertype=&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post2 885784)

I was on a roll for two weeks, won a prize in almost every tourney. Then I cashed out $700. And played No-Limit hold em with my remainning $150. I was delt rags from the very beginning. Fold fold fold. And whenever I had a big hand, like a set, the whole table would fold and I would end up winning 3 BB. These small pots were like fuel is for cars as they vanishes blind after blind. But I was patient.

Then I picked up 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif6 /images/graemlins/club.gif and got raised preflop. Thought to myself what the heck. The flop is 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif2 /images/graemlins/club.gif2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif and I check. The preflop raiser bets 3BB and I raise him to 9BB representing the 2 and he folds. That was the biggest pot I had won. And just as I racked in a decent pot, I got A /images/graemlins/club.gifJ /images/graemlins/club.gif on the next hand. The "preflop raiser" limped in from UTG, so I raised, and he just calls. Flop is K /images/graemlins/heart.gifA /images/graemlins/heart.gifJ /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. I bet, he makes a big raise and I go all in for about $200 (what I had left). His cards were A /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/spade.gif. Tell me that wasn't done deliberately by the site to make me lose /images/graemlins/mad.gif

For 3 hours I had NO CARDS, NADA. And just as I pick up a monster... RIGGED. He did not raise me preflop, what could he possibly have? Ace-rag? Hearts? KJ? I couldn't slow play with the two hearts on the board and all the possible scare cards (K, Q, 10).

I am taking my $700 and running from these FRAUDS. How can anyone trust a computer-generated card distributor that is located in a lawless offshore island somewhere?

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
And just as I racked in a decent pot, I got A /images/graemlins/club.gifJ /images/graemlins/club.gif on the next hand. The "preflop raiser" limped in from UTG, so I raised, and he just calls. Flop is K /images/graemlins/heart.gifA /images/graemlins/heart.gifJ /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. I bet, he makes a big raise and I go all in for about $200 (what I had left). His cards were A /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/spade.gif. Tell me that wasn't done deliberately by the site to make me lose /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, I needed a good laugh this morning.