I have made an argument. It holds without citation. You have claimed something (and said I should 'look it up'). Thus, I can ask you to cite your claims. If your claim is correct and easy for me to look up as you told me to do, it should be easy for you to provide a citation, rather than deflect as you just have.

I know about it. It is irrelevant to your claim.

You previously claimed that the data was never available at any time. Not that it was stored in an encrypted state.

No--since if you know which cards have been dealt at the end of the deal, and that none are duplicated, it must know at every stage of the deal which cards have been dealt. Thus, information about who has what cards is available on the server.

Additionally, even if the server just knows what cards have been dealt but not to whom, that is still incredibly valuable information. Percentages of draws are changed significantly, and knowing specific cards aren't out can help--knowing the ace of a suit wasn't dealt makes your K-high flush more valuable.

LMAO

You told me to look something up. I asked you to show me what it was you told me to look up. Should be easy to do, right, since you implied the information was out there. Simple request.

But then I get the above...no, I comprehend exactly what you're saying. Trouble is, you're wrong.

Don't worry though, I understand your lashing out at me above was because you know you're wrong, but can't admit it. We understand.

Do you understand the difference between an argument and an assertion? I'd guess not, otherwise you wouldn't have written 'lols'.

Please show your math indicating how often this situation will come up and how you plan on altering your play as a result.

Fold 22357 because your opponents could get the 2 eventually obv.

Thought you went away. Are you going to supply a link to what you told me to go read?

because it's your argument?

I'll take that as you admitting you just made things up, can't support them and have to run away. That's what I thought.

And by the way, what I was asking for was the stuff you told me to go read, saying the poker sites didn't keep track of any players hole cards. Couldn't find anything to support that wild assertion of yours, huh?

I don't see the big deal.

Don't dodge the argument.

Let's see some math.

It is kind of funny how some people run away from the truth when they're proven wrong, rather than changing their mind or admitting they're wrong.

Oh well, I should have known that would happen. Most of the time people who write 'u' instead of 'you' are idiots. This guy is proving my general rule correct again

Thanks kavilla!

Oh and kyleb, just be aware of this--he'll ignore you after he runs out of poor arguments, don't waste your breath.

Well, you're dodging the argument you were having with me. You claimed it was horrible because PS had to keep track of your discards which could provide a cheater some information. You then claimed the sites didn't know your hole cards. I showed why this must be false. You stuck your fingers in your ears, and yelled "Is not!" like a child. You said I could go and read about it.

I decided not to guess at which source you were talking about and asked you to point me out to what you wanted me to read, and you went on a childish tantrum, ending with you sticking your fingers in your ears. Instead of just pointing me towards what it was you were talking about (though I'm sure you just made up your assertion, and found you couldn't support it)

But of course, I'm sure that inspires others to have trust in your wild assertions