I'm guessing we'll eventually learn they did both.

Wouldn't you agree that if they intended to rake it all away anyway, why not just take it now?

Did you miss my point about the elegance of the system effectively hiding within normal variance.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but didn't Pokersite put an end to making evidence available under the auspice of protecting it's players from data mining explotation.

Can you put me in touch with one you 'extremely well qualified' friends to discuss holes in my theory?

If you had actually taken the time to read this thread, it would have been very clear that most of the people said that we don't think it can't be rigged. There are far more easier ways, legit ways, to make more money. And it's actually not a stupid way of thinking that without solid proof, to assume it is not rigged or unlikely. They other way around is though.

You will never be able to show that the rng isn't rigged, however you most definately can show that it is rigged when doing a statistical analysis of HH's. It's actually your job to prove it is rigged, stop trying to turn it the other way around. You sound exactly like the other lazy riggies.

The good old conspiracy theory, where everyone is in on it. An easy and cheap way to discredit companies, where you again have 0 evidence for. In case you haven't noticed, the company who audited pokerstars asked 2+2 for their own HH's to make a comparison with what PS had provided them with. Obviously in your own head they're all evil companies who really like to run the risk of having their good name tarnished when it came out. Perhabs they're also on aliens, lizard people or the NWO's payroll?

In riggies heads this simple method is in reality way more harder to do. You probably haven't even thought about how complex such written software must be for it to be profitable and undetectable.

Such software reads the dealer chat on the tables, not quite rocket science.

Obviously running hot never happens in poker

Ye, that must be it. I think you're on to something.

If only there were millions of handhistories that you could study and do a statistical analysis off. If only...oh wait.

Perhabs you should talk to the lawyers who advised them to stay in the US market. According to them the UIEGA does not cover poker, hence the reason they felt not leave the US market. Totally different risk taking than rigging the deals though.

Now here i can agree somewhat. I hardly doubt anyone in this thread would have something against it, if there were recurring audits, perhabs on a yearly basis or more often. However i don't think it will satisfy any riggies, because some will say they are in on it aswell when they hit their losing streak after it has been tested.

The real truth is that riggies are often not very good players. Some of them start with an upswing and then eventually the luck factor is gone and now they start losing. To them, their play is unchanged, they used to be winning for a while with that play and now can't anymore, and they need to blaim something, obviously it's not their poker game that's at fault.

Perhabs there are a few lucky ones, but in most cases, if not all, their winnings graphs will go down over time, as expected. Short term luck is and always will be a part of poker.

Another clueless person who actually has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to variance. There is no hiding within normal variance, end of discussion.

And how long did that take them to take any action, if i think you mean pokerstars? Years and years went by when they did nothing. It were the players who complained about these tracking sites, the players wanted them removed. Tracking sites gave people an unfair advantage to have stats on people they haven't even played against or winning players did not get any action HU for example. I was one of those players who emailed stars, because i do not want my stats online since it's no one's business. But i quess such simple logic isn't as exciting as conspiracy theories.

But good job on making false accusations though, it probably is a perfect fit in your conspiracy theories. You do realize that people still get all their HH's, right? So how exactly is that putting an end to making evidence available?

I didn't miss it - it's gibberish.

You're mistaken. Everyone can still get their hand histories and analyse them.

Sure.

Just click here and post your theory. There are a lot of very friendly, well qualified, people there who will help you out.


BTW, your problems with misunderstanding what's happening in your poker games may stem from not being able to read and comprehend properly. I never stated that any of those people were my 'friends' (they may or may not be but I didn't discourse on the subject). If you are in the habit of reading things which aren't there it could explain your poker failings.

Some random nutjob on the internet would spot it whilst playing and after doing statistical analysis, from memory, in his head he would publish his made up percentages on the internet.

Ugh, just had a The Godfather moment "when i thought i was out, they pull me back in"

I'm assuming by personal experience you mean your playing on various online poker sites? If so, then you can easily obtain your handhistories and have a statistical analysis done to see if there is something that looks amiss.

This is one of the more ridiculous posts I've seen. "Bad beat machine"..."worst hand rewarded maybe 60% of the time"...give me a break. This is pure speculation based on nothing. Insipid.

That's funny. This goes directly against the theory that mentioning any kind of a rigged deck in chat causes the doomswitch. Just go back a few pages and you'll find riggies saying exactly that. So which is it?

^^ Don't try to confuse conspiracy theories and attempt logic...they'll just spin it into another conspiracy...lol.

I'm sorry for assuming you might actually know one of the 'very friendly' and 'well qualified' people you're vouching for. While, I very much appreciate all attempts to poke holes in my theory, I have to say that being petty about such things as my presuming you might actually know one of these people tends to diminish your credibility.

'Discourse'? Really!?

Yes players can get thier own hand histories but that's not a proper sample, and I suspect you know that. But let's suppose I could do a proper statistical analaysis of my own hand histories which showed some significant anomalies, as many have. Skeptics simply say anything is possible given an isolated sample so that doesn't prove anything. We would need everyone's hand histories to do a proper analysis and when that information was "publically available" many did exactly that and found significant anomalies that skeptics simply dismiss due to sample size and variance arguments. I may be a bit out of practice on statisitcs math but I am university educated, including a few statistics courses, so please stop being shallow, dismissive and abusive. Why waste your time and mine?

Again, I'm supposing we'll be forever divided into those who believe and those who dont. Unless and until we have full access to Pokersite's servers and software we might as well discuss religion. My aim here is to lay out a plausible theory for the benefit of those like me who struggle to comprehend persistent bad beats, typically after all the money goes in way good.

BTW, your counter-argument hinges entirely on the abilities of players I presume you also don't know, so you too are just speculating; but thanks just the same for the same old you're an idiot (paraphrase) argument.

But you've based your opinion on that exact sample, right?

Can you link to some of the significant anomalies you referred to? None have been discussed here. I'm assuming you mean statistically significant and not just someone's gut instinct as to what is significant.

You obviously would have no problems to show us those, aren't you? Since there were many who did this according to you, it wouldn't be that hard to find and post it here.

Or perhabs, you're talking nonsense or think that sample size doesn't matter. Maybe even both.

Perhabs.

I'm not going to spend my time compiling all the links to analyses that are already in this thread just so you can poo poo their findings like other nay-sayers..."that's not proof", "the sample size is too small", "who are these people anyway and how do we know if we can trust them". I'd have to answer, right, right, and right again, it's not proof and we don't know who to trust. I think we can all agree on that much.

AGAIN, we'll never prove anything to anyone's satisfaction until and unless Pokersite's servers and software are made available for analysis.

To those who would say Pokersite's servers and software are analyzed regularly by independant auditors, I'm believe you are mistaken. Pokersite does not make their servers and proprietary software available to anyone, ever, for analysis. They only allow their RNG to be tested by people they pay. While I've no reason doubt that their RNG does produce a randomly shuffled deck I've no reason to trust that the cards are dealt as shuffled. I've experience far too many momentary delays before miracle turn and rivers or one outters roll off, and there is a very strong correlation between these momentary delays and miracle beats, especially when my opponent needs runner runner to win after an all-in on the flop. For what its worth, the longest delays are seen when were all-in heads-up pair over pair and board run out str8 to chop the pot so the rake wins.

FT used to continue shuffling the deck even after the first card was dealt. That allowed them to continue shuffling the deck and find the card(s) they wanted to deal on all streets. Pokersite says they use a static shufflle, where the deck is fixed before the first card is dealt, but that doesn't mean they can't just flip through the deck for desired cards the same way.

Yet again, I'll suggest that no sample will ever prove either side of the argument. Like quantum physics and Darren Brown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R5OWh7luL4

tell us, all things are possible...but some things are more or less probable. Until we have full access to Pokersite's servers and software we might as well debate religion.

^^ No sample will ever prove either side? If someone came forward with evidence of these claims (perhaps it might have to come from someone "on the inside", maybe not - I'm not a computer whiz) in a factual manner instead of talking about general conspiracy claptrap, I'd be open-minded enough to look at it. No one said anything about being in love with every room's RNG or their methods overall. However, I'm seeing a lot of the same ridiculous "logic" that I see in debates over 9-11 inside jobs and other insipid arguments.

I see the exact same names as I did when I was here about a year ago (people claiming the rig does not exist, that is). "Wiki", "BobaFett" and "Bingo_Boy". Your being here just pretty much further proves that the rig is highly real. You obviously get paid for being here (because let's face it, no one would be that sad, to spend all their waking hours arguing with people whom they obviously think very little of).

So which of the pokersites are paying you? All of them?


@3ozBacardi, your thoughts are pretty much exactly like mine. And you put it very well.

Especially this:
is indeed spot on. This page http://www.pokertableratings.com/top-countries shows top poker winners by country. Is it a coincidence that Monaco, Malta and Gibraltar are all in the top 4, when the "independent" poker site regulators/auditors are based there? I don't think so........

Because really, that would indeed be quite the coincidence. I eagerly await the 24/7 on-call shills' response to this.

This is sure fire proof that every RNG on every poker site is rigged. Lets face it, you`d think "Boba" was a mod for all the time he spends here. It must be a conspiracy.

All the shills cry for proof that all the sites are rigged, lets see how they react now that someone has posted proof.

Thanks Maynarding.

I've spend quite some time in this thread and up till now there has not been done any proper statistical analysis that shows that there indeed was any proof of rigging.

Posting a few handhistories of bad beats is not proper analysis. Most "analysis" we've seen in this thread is people with psychic abilities, they can see the rig, it's so obvious etc etc. If that were true than it would show up in a proper done statistical analysis, but quess what...no one has ever been able to do so. For some 200 allins looks like a lot, but in reality it's not even worth looking at.

Spadebider for example, however did an extensive analysis, and found no proof of rigging. If i'm correct he did find anomalies on the IPoker network, however that did not mean that those were caused by rigging the deal.

Posting irrelevant links, something we've seen before with other riggies, doesn't prove your case either.

Most riggies have no real understanding about variance, or simply underestimate the role of variance in poker. Variance plays a much bigger part in poker than some want to believe. You should talk to some people who only play live and enter a downswing.

And to make myself clear, I, and many others in this thread, do not say that it is impossible, but given what we have now, unlikely. There are alot of great minds out there in the world, if there was any rigging going on, it would have probably been found by now. And up till today there has been no one who came forward as a whistleblower, i wonder why.

I also disagree with your statement that doing an analysis of the software will satisfy anyone. There will always be people who will continue to claim it is rigged even after being analyzed.

Cheaters, multiaccounters and colluders are getting banned on there and people refunded, doesn't really make sense if they would do that if all they care about was rake, now does it.

LOL. The usual riggie false accusations and their incredible stupid reasoning. Nothing more amusing than to see a conspiracy nutter at work.

p.s alot of poker players went to some of those countries for tax reasons, obviously also being a small country has nothing to do with it to skew the data . But i quess that doesn't sound as exciting as your conspiracy theories.

If I am a shill, then you sir, are a moron. Go back to the bunker and hunker down. I'm sure the black helicopters are on their way...

EDIT: If you'd read what some us were saying instead of taking one or two things out of context, I at least clearly stated that when proof is presented, I'm as open-minded as they come. However, calling someone a shill for asking for proof is disingenuous at best, and if you're waiting for us to eat your crow or something, don't hold your breath. NO ONE wins if sites are rigged, in the end. So if they are, why would you take any satisfaction in that? So you're vindicated for your righteous views?

IHasTehNutz, really?

^^ I say with all due respect, sir...lol. I'm eager to see this proof you say exists. My hand is on the withdrawal button as you speak...

So everyone else's analyses are suspect but Spadebider is trustworthy?

Do you know who owns Pokersite? Would you be surprised to learn that their employees are very well paid shareholders and quite clear about who they work for? As even the skeptics have said here, the online poker industry is full of shady characters and we're leaning more about them, their histories and their scams every day (thank you twoplustwo Pokercast).

Pokersite is highly motivated to protect their turf from colluders, and every other would be cheater, but did not address these concerns, or concerns about multi-accounting, until player representatives only recently expressed distrust of Pokersite for not dealing with these cheats.

Unlikely is not unlikely just because you and other skeptics say so. Frankly I have serious concerns about the usual name calling and abuse. If you have such disdain for us conspiracy theorists why do you and your kind waste your time arguing with us?