Truth about online deals

[Globex]

I'm sure this has been discussed much, but since I am still seeing mention of it I'd like a conclusive answer.
The main question does anyone have any real statistical evidence that some sites deals are biased in some way?
Or at least has someone whose played ALOT of b and m games noticed a diference?
A few bad beat stories don't count!!
and why would they do it? does increasing the betting a little really result in that much more money, and is it worth the risk of alienating people from playing? (which given the superstition of many gamblers is quite easy.) And doing this in a tournament makes no sense b/c there is no extra money to be gained from more betting. (e.g poker stars comes up alot and tournaments are their main thing)
And forgive my ignorance but what exacly is an action flop, is it just based on the texture of the flop (if so I can't see a particular one that would lead to more betting) or one specifically for the whole cards dealt?
And even if they were biased shouldn't there be a way to adjust play to beat it.

Finally--my vent and reason in wondering--I recently had a huge couple month loss at UB playing 2/4 despite doing well at Paradise. Hopefully just part of the random mysteries of the cards. I did loose quite a bit with big hands, defenatley a higher st dev there, but I think just do to more aggressive players.

[clovenhoof]

To answer your questions:

No; yes; greed; no; you're missing the point -- there are other reasons to spike the deck such as to give new players better results so they keep coming back, for example; yes, texture giving lots of possible draws; and finally, yes, but you have to know the bias.

I think this will always be one of those things up there with "Did Oswald act alone?" We'll never really know for sure, mostly because, what could possibly be considered "proof" sufficient to persuade you? I wouldn't take anybody's word other than Sklansky, Malmuth, or Caro (or a few others). All else would just be information that goes in the databank to be considered in the future.

'hoof

[Globex]

If you are talking texture of the flop this would not be hard to "prove" if you colected enough flop data, at least a few thousand you compare this to what should be generated at random and you see how they compare. If they are significantly diferent based on apropriate statistical criteria then there is you proof, as strong as any scientific finding, as something is true when it is statistically unlikley not to be true.

[dux]

It has said that online deals are different to those you will find in a Brick and Mortar casino - and they should be. Online, the shuffle is truly (we hope) random - whereas a B&M shuffle is done by human, and not completely random. I echo clovenhoof in the real fear would be for a cardroom to randomly shuffle a deck, and work out which hand would win a showdown and give it to a new player, or a losing player, a higher % of the time. You couldn't work out if they were doing this like you would be able to by simply recording X number of flops.

But, in reality I don't think any major online cardroom has 'action flops' or a 'catch-up mode' to give them more money and keep the fish alive. Stick with the trusted names, and more importantly stick with the site that you win money on, and you'll be right. As long as you have a healty win rate, you may as well play at a site with a 'rigged' deal.

And yes, this has been discussed much, and you are not likely to get a conclusive answer. Most of the people who have been posting for a long time are too busy winning money to prove whether online shuffles are correct or if propoker is rigged.