How to rig on-line poker?

[carlo]

The sites are rigged more or less and it's staring you in the face and legitimate(?).

1) Keep your lowest betting limits(.5/1) at your expected rake and make this rake double (10%) that of advertised rake.

2) Ante games have a high ante/BB ratio in order to cause reckless behavior and therefore more rake.

3) NL and PL games have lower Max-Buy-In relative to BB therefore causing a squeese on stack and again precipitating more reckless behavior and increasing rake.

4) Noteing that the more thoughtful games are slower than desired and producing a multitudinous array of NL/PL 6-Max games thus causing a tremendous increse in speed of play, reckless behavior, and a terrific increase in rake.

5) Basically, increase speed of play and short stack wherever possible and appealing to the lottery mentality does the job. [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img]

regards,
carlo

[paulish]

[ QUOTE ]
...the fact that no one has proven on-line poker is rigged is strong evidence that it is not rigged

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. The absence of proof, is not proof of absence

[Skirmish]

All of these poker sites are in real competition with each other. If they are all "rigged", then I would just make an unrigged site. Use my programmers to show the others are rigged. And take all the consumers away from the other sites.

The entire industry is built on us trusting them with our money. If anyone ever showed they were rigged it would kill the industry. Would you risk a billion dollar industry to make 10% more in rakes?

Are the sites perfect? No. Could the random program be improved? Perhaps. Will mistakes or injustices happen? From time to time.

But bad beats happen all the time, and online they happen twice as fast.

[paulish]

Right on, Skimrish!
I don't believe in collusion among the sites. But I do believe that if I were to work as a programer or a controler for one of those sites... I might be temted to do some cheatin'... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] would be nice to enter a tourney were you could see all the other players cards...etc [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Pensive Gerbil]

Pardon me if my contribution is redundant (I haven't read other responses). A poker site could cheat with minimal risk of detection by using bots or employee players who sometimes use advance knowledge of what cards will be dealt (and/or knowledge of their opponents' hole cards). In this way, they could cheat with a perfectly random deal. By periodically changing the screen names of the bot or employee players, the cheating could be practically undetectable to outsiders.

Of course, online sites can also just steal the deposits of their customers. If they target a small number of customers with large sums on deposit, the theft may have little impact on their overall business (search the Internet forum for "Prima Poker" for an alleged example).

-PG

[eldynamite]

Speculation like this generally ignores a practical difficulty. A poker site is run by some pretty complex software, and this takes a team of programmers to write and maintain. Any programmer with access to the source code would necessarily have to be part of the conspiracy.

If you were CEO of a poker site, would you put into the hands of several (or perhaps sveral dozen, I don't know) programmers the ability to utterly ruin you?

Oh, and BTW, Hi everybody. My first post here.


Tim

[Yads]

This is just nonsense. What you guys seem to be forgetting is that most people are playing holdem. Why is this? Well that's because bad players have a chance at winning holdem (not in the long run of course). It takes much longer for bad players to go broke. Look at games like Omaha, why aren't there many more players playing it? Well besides the fact that holdem gets much more exposure. It's because bad players go broke really fast in it. Face it guys, it's the nature of the beast, bad beats will happen in holdem because aside from about 5 hands, most hands are not consistent winners.

[lionguy]

The problem I have is if a team is on -- and they are Instant Messaging back and forth. Knowing what two or three people at a table have is a huge advantage

[CORed]

To increase pot size (and therefore rake) encourage people to post extra blinds. Do this by offering a "wait for big blind option". Whenever a player selects this option, during the next hand, change his status to "sitting out". This will cause the player to miss his blind. Eventually, he will want to get into the game and go ahead and post the extra blind out of sheer frustration.

And you thought it was a bug, didn't you?

Note: To counteract this, select the "sit out" button, and, as soon as the action swithces to the next player, click the "I'm back" button. Repeat until it's your blind. It takes some extra attention, but you won't miss your blind.

[Pensive Gerbil]

[ QUOTE ]
If you were CEO of a poker site, would you put into the hands of several (or perhaps sveral dozen, I don't know) programmers the ability to utterly ruin you?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you read an anonymous post on an internet gambling forum by someone who claimed to have inside knowledge that a major poker site was cheating, would you believe the post? Do you think a programmer would risk his (and his family's) safety by launching a public campaign against a criminal gambling enterprise?

Not long ago, a popular franchise website of a major online gambling software company had in their terms and conditions the provision that they could confiscate the money of customers who use betting progressions systems (e.g., Martindale, etc...) to gain an unfair advantage over their gambling games (which have a fixed house edge).

Gambling industry executives are not exactly renowned for their intelligence or integrity. Criminals often unwisely succumb to temptation.

-PG