poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

I'm a serious novice player and have heard some folks disparage party poker and other sites for juicing the games. I know this has been discussed extensively. Basically, what are the opinions of more experienced players? Do these sites intentionally program the deals so that lower sets face higher sets to increase the action and so then increase their rake? Might this happen. Seems like it wouldn't be that hard to do, but if found out would also be the demise of the site.

Thanks for all input and looking forward to the discussion.

zenpractice

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

No. End of thread.

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

Everyone around here belives online poker is rigged. There will be an overwhelming number of votes for "Yes".

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone around here belives online poker is rigged. There will be an overwhelming number of votes for "Yes".

[/ QUOTE ]

You're so naive. You failed to realize that the major online poker sites are also rigging this poll. Do not underestimate their power.

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

There are just under 40,000 registered users on this forum. So could someone please explain to me how there could about 239841 idjits asking this question in the last 6 months??? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

[ QUOTE ]

Reged: 08/18/05
Posts: 1


[/ QUOTE ]

Best part is they waited a month to ask

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

Party/Empire are suspicious.

UB, Stars, Paradise, FullTilt and Pacific(limited) seem legit.

I do not have enough data for definitive proof at this time, and your questions will be met with sarcasm and rudeness on these discussion boards.

The basic premise, I have is that the party network wants to be the most powerful player in the poker world. This is an easy assumption to make. To be the most powerful means making the most money and having the most influence. To do this you need to generate the most rake, and you need to get the most players. How to get the most players then? You need weak player to attract strong players. So, how do you get the most weak players? You keep them on your site as long as possible without busting out. How do you do this? You have a rating system, where the site rates the players based on their previous wins/losses, their rake generated, bonuses received, play frequency etc. Then when a player who is taking money from the site (which has a bad rating) is up against one of these weak players (who has a good rating), you make the poorly rated player lose to the highly rated player by having the poorly rated player win the pot.

This is a logical argument. It is extremely difficult to prove.

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

[ QUOTE ]
Party/Empire are suspicious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Blah, blah, blah...different thread, same old drivel... At least this time you are on topic...


[ QUOTE ]
Then when a player who is taking money from the site (which has a bad rating) is up against one of these weak players (who has a good rating), you make the poorly rated player lose to the highly rated player by having the poorly rated player win the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Curious...how does the poorly rated player lose to the highly rated player if the poorly rated player wins the pot?

Further curious...if taking money from the site is a bad thing to be punished, why do so many people continue to take money from the site month after month after month?

Acme

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

[ QUOTE ]
Party/Empire are suspicious.

UB, Stars, Paradise, FullTilt and Pacific(limited) seem legit.

I do not have enough data for definitive proof at this time, and your questions will be met with sarcasm and rudeness on these discussion boards.

The basic premise, I have is that the party network wants to be the most powerful player in the poker world. This is an easy assumption to make. To be the most powerful means making the most money and having the most influence. To do this you need to generate the most rake, and you need to get the most players. How to get the most players then? You need weak player to attract strong players. So, how do you get the most weak players? You keep them on your site as long as possible without busting out. How do you do this? You have a rating system, where the site rates the players based on their previous wins/losses, their rake generated, bonuses received, play frequency etc. Then when a player who is taking money from the site (which has a bad rating) is up against one of these weak players (who has a good rating), you make the poorly rated player lose to the highly rated player by having the poorly rated player win the pot.

This is a logical argument. It is extremely difficult to prove.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, thanks for clearing that all up for me. I thought the sites just wanted fair games so people would come back and play. I used to think otherwise, but now it is all so clear to me.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Re: poker sites \"juicing\" the game
 

I find it kind of scary that nobody even remains open minded about this.

The rampant refusal to even accept the possibility that things might be amiss must be music to the ears of current/future site owners everywhere.

Like the poster above mentioned, if there was any foul play, it would most likely be to keep the fish in play longer, not generate more rake.