The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

[qpw]

Originally Posted by tk1133

Well, I bet if he played on REALDEAL poker he wouldn't be so angry all the time and wouldn't beat his wife.
Is that what I said or implied? That would be shilling. Maybe I could market that slogan to the Battered Women's Shelter to endorse Realdeal Poker...

When are you going to stop beating your wife?

[tk1133]

I don't beat my wife, but what does beating my wife and online poker being rigged have anything to do w/ this forum and this discussion? Would you like me to refer you to Yahoo chats, and Aol chats where you could spread concern for battered women where it's appropriate?

[KingOfFelt]

Originally Posted by tk1133

I don't beat my wife, but what does beating my wife and online poker being rigged have anything to do w/ this forum and this discussion? Would you like me to refer you to Yahoo chats, and Aol chats where you could spread concern for battered women where it's appropriate?

Yeah...that's exactly what someone who beats their wife would say. Better luck next time bucko!

[qpw]

Originally Posted by tk1133

I don't beat my wife,

We need PROOF!

Until you provide it I don't intend talking to a shameless wife beater whose only concern is that it doesn't cost anyone anything.

[tk1133]

Originally Posted by qpw

I think that's for the regulators to explain.



He should have been caught because there should have been an efficient regulatory framework.

The US was incapable of providing one and now you want them entrusted with online poker.

Don't you ever learn?



I assume you thought that gibberish meant something when you typed it.

Or were you so busy giving your wife a thrashing that you couldn't concentrate?

Now we're getting somewhere. Before you go cranking up your google, I can tell you after 60 years of such ponzi schemes getting caught, it left a blue print for our modern "slimeballs" on how to avoid detection and not get caught..."Built from destruction..."

-It was more elaborate then your making it. Maybe you should actually research HOW he got caught. Is there a postive coorelation here?

[Username^^]

Originally Posted by tk1133

Now we're getting somewhere. Before you go cranking up your google, I can tell you after 60 years of such ponzi schemes getting caught, it left a blue print for our modern "slimeballs" on how to avoid detection and not get caught..."Built from destruction..."

-It was more elaborate then your making it. Maybe you should actually research HOW he got caught. Is there a postive coorelation here?

no, you.

[qpw]

Originally Posted by tk1133

Now we're getting somewhere. Before you go cranking up your google, I can tell you after 60 years of such ponzi schemes getting caught, it left a blue print for our modern "slimeballs" on how to avoid detection and not get caught..."Built from destruction..."

-It was more elaborate then your making it. Maybe you should actually research HOW he got caught. Is there a postive coorelation here?

Ponzi schemes have been going since, well, Ponzi!

The regulatory authorities hold all the cards.

They make the rules and they have the clout to ensure that they are complied with.

They simply did not use due dilligence in the matter of Bernie Madoff.

None of your waffle is going to get around that plain and simple fact.

Many thousands of people face financial ruin because of the incompetance of the US regulatory authorities.

And this is in a field in which they have had over a century to get their act together.

Christ knows what sort of a series of monumental cockups they would make whilst the attempted to get to grips with online poker.

Your attitude seems to be a triumph of naive optimism over bitter experience.

[tk1133]

Originally Posted by qpw

When are you going to stop beating your wife?

When I stop getting 3 outted on the river.
It's her fault I lose...she's always talking to me when I'm trying to make all in decisions preflop w/ strong suited connectors (5-6, up to 9 10 for example.) I mean, I know when I got suited connectors of spades, I'm supposed to move all in preflop if more then 2 people limp. But I get 8 9 of clubs, and two people go all in in front of me, and she's like "What's for dinner?" So in my mind I know I have no money to buy us dinner, but she didn't have to remind me and throw it in my face! So I fold. B/c I'm broke as it is, and it's not two spades. Low and behold I would of rivered a flush to beat 99 and JJ. If she would of kept her mouth shut, I would of carefully equated the equity and varience in my head and made the correct call. I mean it was sooooootttteeed.
<morons>*cough,cough*

[Monteroy]

Originally Posted by tk1133

Now we're getting somewhere. Before you go cranking up your google, I can tell you after 60 years of such ponzi schemes getting caught, it left a blue print for our modern "slimeballs" on how to avoid detection and not get caught..."Built from destruction..."

-It was more elaborate then your making it. Maybe you should actually research HOW he got caught. Is there a postive coorelation here?

Not to get caught up in your wife beating technique debate, but I guess I would ask this:

Can you name a single non regulated industry or business that does not cheat it's customers?

As a footnote, it is really a strange thing that some riggedologists seek government involvement in areas they do not understand, as typically most paranoid personalities find fault with governments.

Of course even if it ever was regulated by a government they trust, nothing would change, riggedologists would still believe the rooms cheat, only that they have not been caught yet (or some variation of that)

[SooperFish24]

Originally Posted by DMoogle

Sooper, unless I missed it, you didn't respond when I asked you what your definition of a shill was. Please tell me so I can confirm.

Sorry I've been out and watching the awesome Andy Murray match.

There's the Wikipedia definition.

Shills on the Internet
In online discussion media, satisfied consumers or "innocent" parties may express specific opinions in order to further the interests of an organization in which they have an interest, such as a commercial vendor or special-interest group. Websites may also be set up for the same purpose. For example, an employee of a company that produces a specific product may praise the product anonymously in a discussion forum or group in order to generate interest in that product, service or group. In addition, some shills use sock puppetry where they sign on as one user soliciting recommendations for a specific product or service. They then sign on as a different user pretending to be a satisfied customer of a specific company.

In some jurisdictions and circumstances this type of activity may be illegal. In addition, reputable organizations may prohibit their employees and other interested parties (contractors, agents, etc.) from participating in public forums or discussion groups in which a conflict of interest might arise, or will at least insist that their employees and agents refrain from participating in any way that might create a conflict of interest.

My defintion is basically that there are a small group of people possibly using multiple forum accounts who's job it is to defend Online Poker no matter what anyone's opinion or possible evidence shows up. This can be seen early on in the AP/UB scandal before actual evidence shows up to support the theory, you will find forum users calling people names like rigtard, idiot or dellusional until actual evidence came to light. Often the shills will call the people questioning a site's integrity these names in an attempt to make the accuser look ridiculous when it is absolutely the opposite to question site integrity.

[tk1133]

Originally Posted by SooperFish24

Sorry I've been out and watching the awesome Andy Murray match.

There's the Wikipedia definition.



My defintion is basically that there are a small group of people possibly using multiple forum accounts who's job it is to defend Online Poker no matter what anyone's opinion or possible evidence shows up. This can be seen early on in the AP/UB scandal before actual evidence shows up to support the theory, you will find forum users calling people names like rigtard, idiot or dellusional until actual evidence came to light. Often the shills will call the people questioning a site's integrity these names in an attempt to make the accuser look ridiculous when it is absolutely the opposite to question site integrity.

+1

[KingOfFelt]

Originally Posted by SooperFish24

Sorry I've been out and watching the awesome Andy Murray match.

There's the Wikipedia definition.



My defintion is basically that there are a small group of people possibly using multiple forum accounts who's job it is to defend Online Poker no matter what anyone's opinion or possible evidence shows up. This can be seen early on in the AP/UB scandal before actual evidence shows up to support the theory, you will find forum users calling people names like rigtard, idiot or dellusional until actual evidence came to light. Often the shills will call the people questioning a site's integrity these names in an attempt to make the accuser look ridiculous when it is absolutely the opposite to question site integrity.

Seriously though, how much does RealDeal Poker pay you to shill for them?

[SooperFish24]

Originally Posted by qpw

We need PROOF!

Until you provide it I don't intend talking to a shameless wife beater whose only concern is that it doesn't cost anyone anything.

To relate proving that I don't beat my wife to Online Poker is to say;

Prove that Online Poker isn't rigged!

So are King of Felt and qpw now saying that it's on them to prove that Online Poker is not rigged rather than me to prove it is rigged.

[Bingo_Boy]

Originally Posted by tk1133

Lottery is a game of chance. I thought we've proven poker wasn't a game of chance, but skill. Also state lottery's are regulated so nothing is manipulated...Good example tho

So good that your fragile brain has missed the point of it

Originally Posted by SooperFish24

...no matter what anyone's opinion or possible evidence shows up. This can be seen early on in the AP/UB scandal before actual evidence shows up to support the theory, you will find forum users calling people names like rigtard, idiot or dellusional until actual evidence came to light. Often the shills will call the people questioning a site's integrity these names in an attempt to make the accuser look ridiculous when it is absolutely the opposite to question site integrity.

You know what to do then don't you.

[SooperFish24]

Originally Posted by qpw

That's a very good point.

Come on, fish supper we need proof!

Proof that you are not a shill for RealDeal.

Proof that you either don't have a wife or have stopped beating her.

Are your family proud of you coming on this forum and shilling for RealDeal?

Are they proud to have a wife beater in the family?

When someone accuses you of something it's too easy for you to duck the question by then turning around and accusing the accuser. You couldnt do this in a court of law. If you had however accused me first then it would be on me to answer.

As far as I'm aware RealDeal poker is non existant and therefore a $0 dollar industry.

Online Poker however and especially the majors like Pokerstars and FTP is a multibillion $ industry.

Which one would realistically employ shills?

Why would Real Deal need shills (if it even existed) as it is a real deal?

My family would probably prefer I didnt gamble at all or be invloved in Poker though I think they would prefer that I stand on my "rigtard" side of the fence.

As I am unmarried so far I cannot answer for future events like wifebeating so ask me again if and when I marry.