Because it's completely irrelevant. Your hand was 53% to win, which means that you're supposed to lose 47% of the time. 53% equity isn't significant, sport. Your posts ITT suggest otherwise You probably play horribly judging by how much you're pissed off about losing one hand where you were a slight favorite. You don't seem to have basic poker knowledge like understanding equities yet you're certain you've uncovered some kind of rig but the icing on the cake is even though you've uncovered this rig you refuse to exploit it because you're "not able to play like a ******". Seems pretty ******ed to me to stick to a strategy that the site is rigging against you when you know that if you just switched to calling shoves with junk you'd crush. The **** does this even mean? Your proposed rig is ******ED because it's the most easily exploitable rig ever.

Quit poker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kycdQnKPz0

how often is he supposed to win?

are you able to compare 53 and 18?

i am gonna refrain from sharing what i think your posts here suggest about u.

bla bla bla bla bla...

After a semi-amusing start with a hint of potential - you turned out to be a complete dud as a riggie. Disappointing!

Oh well, onto the next riggie when you vanish. Next one may always be a fun one, and time for that grandpa guy to come back during the intermission like the clowns at a Cirque show.


All the best.

Howdy. Former Non-Riggie here. I was sure sites were not rigged, but this QQ losing to AQ and
7 5 now has me convinced it really is rigged.

So I am in cash game I raised get called guy jams all in for like 1/4 a stack I call next guy jams in fold. First all in guy has TT. Guy who isolated had Q3. So where are these better players I hear about. No side pot isolation with Q3. I am glad he did tho cuz he hit 2 pair. But the games are tougher. I am thinking of doing a segment and posting a hand or 2 every day of all these "better" players thst exist now. Cuz after all our win rates are down cuz players are much better now

Seems like my range needs a slight adjustment. As you can see below my range does include Q2o because it is just about as big of a gap as possible but it didn't anticipate people playing hands as bad as TT rather than KK+. To balance for this the new range might have to include Q3o as well to maximize winrate in the long run.

Thanks for the extra data point and let me know when these things happen so I can adjust. Also please don't share this outside this topic because I think we're onto something.



I have constructed the adjusted range specially for jungmit.

We are onto something. Players are not better and yet somehow winners have smaller win rates. That is what we are on.

Indeed players are not better. You're still playing after all.

Hey i win 8 bb per 100. Just wondering why I dont win 15 bb per 100. Must be all those better players

You're defintely on to something. The lifers FLOCKED in here from all over the forum to try and make fool of you, even Haven had a poke and threw a few stones, lol. I think it was the target "theory" which would instantly give credence to both the good and bad target theory. That would incriminate an individual or more likely a small group of indiduals ( see paul tate, nelson burtnick who took one for the team). Dont wanna suggest online is rigged with a highly plausible theory around these parts, certain people who directly rely on its success for finances will be crippled. We get it

Ok, this might be more suitable for USA only sites, I truly have not played on stars etc since around the shutdown time.

I am a former mid/high stakes 6m and HU player, (2-4 up to 25-50 vs right person) I definitely was never one of the elite online players, but I made a very healthy living.

I had always had concerns even pre shutdown about the genuineness of the RNGs on some sites, and I have never ever once believed I was being cheated, or that a site was rigged for anyone in particular.

However, when I play the available sites today (I am admittedly a fish in anything above 100NL for the most part) things do not feel right. When I play PLO things feel watered down on TruePoker, there is seemingly always someone potting 100% of actions on Ignition/Bovada who has a dozen buyins on the table (I have seen almost 30 on a table from someone who was potting 100% of actions, literally) and SWC actually feels very genuine to me (small site, I usually trusted these sites far more pre shutdown though there were isolated incidents that were poor) NL I have the random fish flop 2pair and weird straights on me, but when I defend out of BB with these hands I literally can say I have made these type of hands so rarely and don't think I have ever even gotten a stack in when hitting those hands.


So my point-

In 2017, are we all so naïve to not think that sites would have RNGs that keep stats on players just like your PT and HEMs do, and to skew cards to players who have bad statistics to help them out a bit? Lets face it, poker is a dying market (thanks to the ****s who lobbied to shut online down to help their brick and mortar casinos which are not as busy as they would be if they had left online alone and definitely wont have the longevity they would have)

Technology is amazing, what I feel like sites have is not a hard feat to pull off. Would be super easy to implement, and I frankly think it is there. This is not to say that good players don't win (I still have small win rates despite wanting to pull my hair out with how nitty the games have gotten- which is also not good for enticing fish to want to play, but that's another discussion)

This does not rig it for anyone in particular, just allows fish to stand on a more stable ground, keeping money in play longer in a dying market where new players really are not popping up at a fast enough rate to sustain the poker economy, and certainly are not popping up into larger games very often.

Anyone naïve enough to think that these websites (off shore not under any real jurisdiction) have more integrity in them than greed for profits is kidding themselves, and like I said I am not saying it is rigged for anyone in particular (the fish are not profiting and taking it to the bank obviously) and good players will still win (though at a lower rate than if things were 100% authentic and random)

I have quit using PT and HEM but I would like to see some regs on true post some stats, any pot you flat opens pre with any pairs I would be curious to see your flopped set rates. (3b 4b pots excluded)

Id like to see the same stat for unpaired cards flopping a pair, suited cards flopping a flush draw. Just some stats to see if people are holding with the numbers with a fair amount of volume. Like I said I am not using HEM or PT but I feel like I am running less than the norm doing those things, while I see fish at the table running better than the norm- and before people say perception blah blah, I definitely have logged at minimum 25M hands online (inc MTTs) and hell it might be 50M hands, I played a ton from 2004-2012 and sparingly over the last 2 years. I have a fair understanding that you can perceive things that really are not valid while playing online. Maybe I am stone cold wrong here, but things do not feel right while I play.

So I have been playing stud8 on True over NL and PLO just because the games are tough at NL and insane tight vs what they were in 2011 and like I said above, PLO feels watered down on True, my tables will go 10 and 20 orbits without someone even using the all in button sometimes, which is kind of nuts for PLO and really nuts when people are 3betting a fair amount and all 3bets get called for the most part, so its check fold on so many flops or ck ck bet fold turns.


I am sure this will get grilled a lot, but be open minded and do consider what you would do if you owned a poker site in a dying market, ways to prolong it, and if you find yourself having too good of morals to do this kind of stuff.... Pretend all these sites are owned by the same people who own and operate ATT, Comcast, Wells Fargo, FTP you get the drift.

I also do not think what I have said is anything that is new, I think FTP did this a long time ago, PS felt much much better than FTP back in the day and somehow win rates were higher on PS despite PS being tougher- ( locally all the fish who played live and would dabble online would ONLY play FTP because they couldn't win on PS but FTP gave them their shot once in a while - also my MTT successes on FTP were always so clumped together, several days I won multiple mtts yada yada- and I have an acct on FTP if you sharkscope and check the stats on it that it tells a lot about FTP- I used to fund my mothers FTP and she played those 3$ 90 man knockouts exclusively- she was TERRRRRRIBLE- she colorcoated players based on if she liked them or not, and color coated everyone she played with, and when you had a bad color for her not liking you, she literally jammed on you with just about any two if not any two if she really didn't like you, my mother god bless her was far and away the worst poker player I have ever seen in my life. She would make me watch her and coach her but never take ANY advice, and just have to see the next card with any kind of outs (backdoor flushes included)

SO with her acct that I funded, she had IIRC 7k games logged (I had played a time or two on the acct, I had made the acct for me as a second acct then gave it to her) and her final table statistics were where you could tell something was funny, because she had considerably more 1st place finishes than ANY other specific spot at the final table. Meaning, when she was gonna win she was gonna win (and she surely blew a lot of those, she really was terrible at poker) but it was nearly 2-1 over the next place (if anyone wanted to look, the username is DADuhWEEwah -which is what my username was on several sites, merge was where I was most known and where I spent most of my time) so someone can go verify those statistics, but be sure to only look at the KO 90 mans (I think they were 3$ but they might have been 1.50 or something- she played a ton of them , one table at a time, but she rarely lasted long, her stats are very funny) I could be misremembering the exact details if it was 2-1 over the next spot, but it def had 1st place more often than any other spot and was considerably higher than most if not all spots. It has been a long time since I looked at that, and I don't think I can see what I want to see without a scope sub so I wont go check.


Anyways, I did search the forum for any threads similar to this and didn't find one (didn't look too hard) saw the riggedthread that is way old.


And just so none of yall can say I didn't do anything for you with this thread- youtube "chuck Norris sniper everyday people" and enjoy the funniest video I have ever seen I think.

that chuck norris video isn't funny at all

pretty sure it's gonna show correct frequencies when flopping those sets.

If there is smth shady going on along the line you explained(and I do believe in 2017 it would be naive to exclude the possibility) it would be in the way that when the pro player does flop a set the fish has no hand at all most of the time.

That way every frequency looks right and it's next to impossible to prove anything shady going on.

The sites in 2017 are very sneaky, not only can they hire programs to put in hands on the fly that reward and punish the specific players (because they can via some form of mind control make everyone play in the exact manner anticipated), but they also pay these programmers enough so that none of them have ever revealed the secrets in an era where CIA secrets are released. People like the OP reporting what they see and feel is their only weakness, but fortunately no hand history databases can ever confirm these suspicions. Again, part of the master plan.

I do agree with Monteroy that nothing shady is going on at least on the major sites bc (minimum reason) they would get into serious trouble if some programmers leak out info.
You seem to be 105% sure about it though, while I'm around 95% ish. (absoluto superuser scandal, fulltilt "segregated" money issues, etc)

P.S: the point was not to mind control everyone to play in the manner anticipated but it would make the fish last way longer if when the reg flops a set they flop high card K.
Of course some of them will still lose a ton even on that, it would just be to make them last a bit longer.

If I am not mistaken, there was a person or group that data mined all the FTP NL tables for X amount of hands (in the millions) and they released a study of how unnatural the flop textures were, cited each cards % to be on a flop - turn or river etc, had a bunch of data but within a week if not days of being released it just disappeared. I could be 100% wrong on that, I am only going on word of mouth through the players I skyped or Aimed with back in the day, but I am pretty confident that this was something that was done and there was some pretty incriminating information about the randomness of what was on the flops.

I wouldn't be surprised if any site does it...

And yea, I guess my question about flopping sets and pairs is probably wrong, they wouldn't let that skew. BUT, if you could find a complete fish who would give up all his hand logs, comparing the two would work. You would obviously need a Scout326 type fish who has played a **** load of hands and obviously not on that network.

I do know when I flop low sets the board is generally two other low cards, and I very very seldom get action, so that point is probably more valid than me assuming the probability of hitting hands is lowered for someone playing a more optimal set of numbers on a HUD. (im not even sure what those are its been so long since I have had HEM and never ran HUDS during matches- I think they should be illegal to use during games, they are essentially turning players into bots once you learn how to read the data quickly and accurately)

Jesus. You have an anecdote about something that happened, or may have happened, or may 100% not have happened, about something you're not sure about.

Remember the scene at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark where the ark turns out to be one of many just like it, and is buried away in a seemingly endless secret warehouse? Well this thread is that ark, and the Rigtards thread is the warehouse.

Agree,

Welcome to "players are better now" hands of the day. In this segment we are looking at 3 hands today.
1. I got QQ it get raised in front of me I 3 bet 1 player calls cold. First player calls. Flop is J74, checked to me I make a pot bet on flop player behind me shoves I call he has AK.

2. I am on the big blind with JJ. Button raises I 3 bet he calls. Flop is 552 I bet out button raises I jam over his raise he calls with 77.

3. I got AA I raise it then gets 3 bet(the joy, or rig of 2 big hands dealt together) I 4 bet, players calls. Flop is Q93. Some this guy decided to call with JJ for his stack on the flop.

Ah alas we have seen some good poker today. Stay tuned all. I think this could become a popular segment. Just another day in the world of "players are much better now".

I also read something about this a while back.

Ah yes, the infamous University study that didn't even know how to do basic math.

Funnily enough, there is a study done on flop randomness that uses hundreds of millions of hands of data right here.

There are even a bunch of words describing the data, wowee! How do you know this?
Hi jungmit, this is called "anecdotal evidence". Your fellow riggie that you quoted in the post that was merged into this one describes themselves as
Do you think they're in on the shill conspiracy that games today are harder than they once were? Do you think the fact that you can find a whole 3 hands where people made dumb plays somehow disproves what everyone else agrees has happened to online poker in the past few years? Do you think that removing American fish, who were by far the biggest losers in poker, from the player pools has had no impact on the toughness of games? Nah.

But if I find a whole 3 hands every day playing on 100 hands that gotta mean something. Also I have more then 3 hands. Those 3 were the worst played of the day. Stay tuned. Removing American fish had no impact cuz they for euro fish who are worse now. The only thing differnt about the game is smaller preflop raises. Stay tuned

It means 97% of the hands you see don't involve terrible players. The only one of the hands you posted that seemed incredibly bad was the AK stacking off with nothing, someone getting squirrely with their pair of 7s as an over pair to the board and someone deciding their jacks are good on a Q high flop aren't exactly drooler level terrible. That's my whole point: You're cherry picking poorly played hands and then using them as evidence that games today are as soft as they've ever been. No one's saying there are literally no fish, just that there are a **** load more regs, which makes games overall harder. PTR used to have a list of countries and winrates, and the US not only had the most players, it had the worst winrate at something like -15bb/100. No matter how terrible new Euro fish may be, there aren't as many of them as they were American fish. So you think everyone just switched to small ball because they were tired of crushing fish so hard or something? Why are you so married to this "players haven't gotten better" thing? You use some sort of tracker, right? Next time you decide to post an example of how players totally aren't better, can you post the hand with the stats from whatever software you use? I'm not trying to trick you into outing your screen name or anything, so feel free to convert the hand, but I'd be very interested to see the VPIP/PFR of the players at your table, especially the fish making these horrendous plays.

I'm sure they'll all be somewhere around 26/3 or whatever fishy stats looked like back in 2011, right?

Not true. I have way more hands or bad play. Just not gong to post 40 hands per day