Originally Posted by blatantlyrigged
If you keep playing after cashing out, the profit you had will eventually be funneled back into the site plus more. As you will get mainly suck outs, no hands at all, etc. The rebuy is a very important to these sites, as is deposits of course. By manipulating the deal to create this, it prevents players from taking large amounts out of the site, and passes it to newer players to get them hooked. The cycle repeats itself over and over.
Very short explanation i know, but Ive gone through this so many times.
Obviously theres more to it. But this gives you an idea.
Let me ad for our uninformed guest if you don't mind Mr. BR, Online poker sites are cheating because someone is winning on rigged hands; it just means that they (the greedy scum running the sites) defeat the edge that presumably guys like me and you would have against newbies and other reckless or unsophisticated or non-shrewd players and don't forget they have the greatest software a system designed to encourage poor and below average players to continue playing would very much benefit a poker web site and would not need to mark each individual player as either "good" or "bad".
The system or software can handicap who is "good" or who is "bad". The site's software only needs to systematically provide miracle turn and river outs that would never or rarely happen in real poker. The players who would be the recipients of these magic bad beats would obviously be the players who made bad decisions. Instead of losing because of their mistakes and allowing good players to benefit from exploiting those mistakes, the software would and as you have experienced bail's them out.
In a nutshell shady investors partnered with software programers took a look at a poker society that loves action and excitement. No one likes the defensive-oriented team that grinds out wins. They want the high-powered offense that scores big. Likewise, most people are not going to be happy playing in poker games where they have to fold 80% of their hands and often win uncontested pots when they raise with good cards. They want showdowns and big twists. They want big hands being beat by bigger hands being beat by huge hands all decided by the river. EUREKA!!! A CON IS BORN!
I'm no statistics guru, but it seems to me that the argument that more bad players equates to more bad beats doesn't make sense. I would think that more bad players should mean more reward for those who play correctly.
That never seems to be the case.