You ran well last year, games got tougher and you're running poorly this year?

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

99% sure that's it. Somebody told me you gonna run so bad you could not even imagine, but he did not tell how long it will last

forever and ever on an impossible to randomise number generator, aka the internet.

13yrs on Stars and around 10 million hands and I've yet to have a single heater, well anything that lasts more than 3 hands anyway. In that time I've seen about 6 runouts that weren't massively influenced to match players in the hand's holdings. Although it's offending the majority of the poker human race, I say that for anyone to think this **** is remotely real (u need about 4 minutes to see the hilarity of it) then they must have a huge piece of brain missing. It's lolariously as unrandom as the pre planned patternised sun rise.

You are a troll, right?

Those rigs that are visible in 4 minutes yet impossible to prove with hand histories - ah, those diabolical poker sites! What will they think of next?

Only a fool would play an game which he thinks is unfair.

Great point. But say it's rigged to make winners win less? They still win but maybe they win less then study should? Take this ......u got a losing player playing 2 tables at 220 hands per hour. Say he is playing 2 winners 2 break even and 1 more loser. 120 hands per hour 2 hours a day 240 hands. What are the odds that he is ever going to win 1 day?

Jhub3000 did a whole breakdown 1 time showing how much your roi will decrease for each winner u got a your table in sngs. Sngs include a ton more luck then cash games and if i sat at a table with 5 losers your roi would be huge. Just 2 winners bring it down by more then half. Now u tell me in a cash game how would u assume it's possible for a losing player playing with 2 break even and 2 winners ever have a winning day?

You just keep making less and less sense. Do you imagine intricate conspiracies like this in everything ? Or is it just about poker ?

You take him too seriously and literally. He is just a geezer that shows up between riggies to get attention. Good or bad attention - no difference to him. Have fun with him, and at his expense, but never take him or anything he says seriously. Essentially his job for this thread is the equivalent of being a Fluffer.

How does this make less sense? If u took a loser live and put him at a 6 max table with 2 winners and 2 break even players I would be willing to bet they don't show a profit more the 2 of every 10 sessions and it's am not never going to be a big profit. Online I will be willing to bet losers win half the days they play. U guys are always telling me how online players are so much better, well how does a loser win so much more often online then?

Montrolling

You see nothing wrong with this statement ?

Meh, another semi-prop bet you will never carry through on.

Anyway, sharkscope the player Magiccoin on Stars and you tell me how he is winning on half the days he plays. He even violates the cherished new player boomswitch belief, as he lost right off the start and kept going for a decade.

Probably a guy with the money to afford losing, so if that is his hobby within his bankroll that is fine (for everyone), but there is a specific example that goes against your latest belief you claim that you are willing to bet on (that you would never actually bet on). Be less boring.

All the best.

Not to mention the fact that if his statement that "losing players" win half the days they play online were true, then how the heck are they still losing players ?

I assume the theory will be some sort of balancing one like

Lose $800
Win $100
Win $300
Win $200
Lose $200
Win $300


That way a losing player still loses, but he has more winning days so keeps playing etc. etc.


Who cares? He lies about everything, and this latest made up theory of his took 5 seconds to show an example that disproves it. Stop taking his stuff so seriously!

Meh, get the laser riggie back.

Here's one of those morans ^ but he's certainly no minority.

Here check out the 4 $550k spins in a row guy. Not patternised in the remotest eh boys.



Is "post hh's" all you've got to come with? lmao ok I'll get the 10m loaded up right away for the controlling elite's to chuckle away at.

How's about first of all, YOU prove a computer can randomise. Trawl the internet, it cannot be done spackerz.

You play life don't you? You're scammed into paying "taxes" which goes to very little other than funding murder. You're scammed into thinking food is real (we are frugivores, only wild fruit is human food) you're scammed into every little thing you think you know. What a ****ing fool you are.

i'd say they are incorrectly tracked games since you cant win $500k in the $25 spins. actually you can only win scoop tickets there.

Holy cow! Look at what you discovered!

Now, of course if you took 15 seconds to really think it out you might realize that all you really discovered was a sharkscope recording error, as all that person did was win a few $25 spin and gos which gave entry to the 109 main.


Spins typically do not show on sharkscope, but since this was a satperhaps it created this error.

Even in the lobby you can see that the max prize possible for the $25 spins are tournament entries, not $500,000 +, and if you bothered to request the tournament histories of them you would get this email

PokerStars Tournament #1911082960, No Limit Hold'em
Super Satellite
Buy-In: $23.50/$1.50 USD
3 players
Total Prize Pool: SCOOP-55-L: $109 NLHE [Main Event], $1.5M Gtd & $100K+ to first!
Target Tournament #1871889208 Buy-In: $100.00/9.00 USD
1 tickets to the target tournament

Tournament started 2017/05/12 10:20:24 ET
Tournament finished 2017/05/12 10:29:05 ET
1: 0llllie (United Kingdom), (qualified for the target tournament)
2: ZlatkoJohan (Kazakhstan),
3: samara970 (Russia),


so the error is that sharkscope likely used the "$1.5M Gtd" prize pool by mistake when calculating the win.

Riggies and common sense - two things that do not mix.


All the best.

Games got tougher? Where? The players are exactly the same as they have member for years. Min raising trying to steal blinds. Players actually going to non raises which is even more comical and not folding on the flip to a c bet in position. Wow creative and tough games.
I don't get why people say the games are so tough. They say u can't beat 5nl. Where are these games so tougher? The players I play with make the same types of plays and play the same types of hands as they did 10 years ago.

1. I will be looking forward to you giving your 10m HH database up for analysis. Here's the deal. Upload your HH's and I will ask nicely for you in the stats forum for people to take a look at them since you seem to have quite a big temper. But you have to tell me what should I be asking for: flush draws, OESD, action flops, aces hitting too often etc. You need to have a theory of how it is rigged.

2. A computer cannot truly randomize, that's true. That's why the sites like Pokerstars for example use external sources of entropy : thermal noise, user input like mouse movements and mythical laser beams. Those are truly random sources and makes the cards unpredictable.

Oh noes, he called me a bad name!

FWIW, I wasn't saying it's not rigged, just that if you can see it's rigged within 4 minutes it should be exceedingly easy to prove it statistically.

I'm not trying to "come up with" anything. It's a pretty simple concept - if you can see that it's rigged so easily, you should be able to prove it just as easily, and blow the top off a huge scandal. I have no idea why you wouldn't want to do this.

No idea what a "spackerz" is, but there's no need for me to trawl the Internet for something I, and most in this thread, are very aware of. Computer RNGs are able to closely approximate randomness, but there are still patterns. Likely not ones that would enable you to notice so obviously, but it doesn't matter, because of course they do this:

Hardware random number generator

Quantis Random Number Generator

I love how that Top Pig moron presents his biggest "evidence" which is the glitch in sharkscope which of course gets totally crushed because he didn't check his facts before he screams it out like a little biatch.