My assessment is the squid squad is performing a most excellent troll on you and others who are trying to be rational and reasonable. I don't know for sure, but that is my considered opinion having participated in and moderated Internet fora since 1979. But if I'm wrong, I'll be the first to admit it.

BTW the UIGEA doesn't ban transactions with gambling sites, only with illegal gambling sites. And skill-based contests for money have been around for years and have no problem using Paypal: see www.royalgames.com

QL

Sweepstakes are not skill based games.

Chumba Casino uses Sweepstakes cash prize gaming, combined with a certified online gambling platform, to provide a legal online "gambling" experience, that mimics gambling play but is actually a fully legal & compliant sweepstakes.

This is from their casino, what I am saying is that they are doing the exact same.thing but imstead of a slot displaying sweepstakes wins it's a poker game displaying SWEEPSTAKES wins.

No, I disagree. The 'sweepstakes' gaming is what is extremely misleading on the surface but it is only to circumvent various laws.

Were you aware that Draft Kings falls under the auspices of a sweepstakes? Global is just taking advantage of the entry way into receiving monies for poker, betting, gaming, etc... there doesn't seem to be an obvious intention of deceiving the individual players.

No one can argue that Chumba is doing exactly what you just wrote. Poker is played at Global.

You are wrong on this assessment. These guys are genuine, with a couple being the sticky note on the wall conspiracy type guys (the guy who continues to dissect "sweepstakes" for his agenda) or the degen whiner riggie types like the dude who complains about gutshots.

The irony is I assumed you were talking about my posts, as I am definitely semi-trolling them, because it is fun to see how genuine paranoid people react to reality, and true crazies like 9/11 addicts are too insane to have any real fun with in that regard.

This site certainly has some legitimate issues including the sloppy T&C and that hands are not saved (I would assume they will implement this in future). Also, their end around with the sweepstakes model is certainly a valid point of debate.

However, none of these manifesto guys are really debating those points without including their riggie agenda in the mix, whether its the inane every hand is 50/50 even if drawing dead dude, or the guy who says it is not dealt like real poker, yet apparently there is no way to show that with a proper analysis, even though the hands will show it.

As a general rule of thumb riggies tend to actually distract from the potential genuine issues due to their obsessive need of their beliefs and agenda. Lock Poker was paying nobody for years and riggies were still whining about flush draws hitting too much.

I certainly had some fun tweaking the variety of riggies in this thread (started to get difficult to tell them apart), and obviously this thread will get nowhere other than being a form of catharsis for some of these guys with their agenda, but hopefully the few genuine issues that are getting semi-noticed will find their own thread to be discussed without all the riggie baggage. Transparency of those issues would be beneficial to both the site and the players.

So many armchair lawyers ITT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A dewb, i need for you to be crystal clear on what game you think Global Poker is offering.

A) Are they offering a real US money poker game based upon virtual currency which they believe they can classify as sweepstakes because they are using virtual currency?

B) Are they offering a sweepstakes poker game with real money prizes for consideration?

C) Are they offering a social poker game between real individuals with real money wins via virtual currency that they classify as a sweepstakes?

D) Are they offering a poker contest with consideration being given?

I have seen you reference other industry models and make parallels to Global Poker. Let us be clear, most of the other models are base upon a membership model where actual true consideration is not given to participate in the poker games. Therefore, are you arguing that the Sweeps Cash Global Poker is using is not actually true consideration. Because if you are, they do not have limits like the other sweepstakes models have on the amount to the virtual currency you can obtain.

Please respond, and BTW real good information you posted in thread 270, and I did read the entire prospectus and encouraged others to do the same so they can come to their own conclusions. Some people just do not want to do that.

I guess your question confused them

well, ive withdrawn with this site once, and i have a second pending. regardless of this discussion, they are honoring my cashouts, and respond in a reasonable timeframe. that is worth considering.

Not so much, you guys and your agendas are quite simple. However, chats like this eventually have a saturation point where there is little more to accomplish, as nobody's opinion will ever be changed.

That PT dude can continue on forever, much like a truther going on about the melting point of steel. Everything makes perfect sense in his mind like a completed complex puzzle, even though his whole premise is based on unqualified opinions that he deludes himself into believing are facts. The rest of you are more the follower types complaining about your general situation and using this room as the cause. Fun for a while to stir up the pot, but it gets boring.

Anyway, I do hope some of the real issues (their T&C clarity, HHs being saved, a proper debate about the end around sweepstakes model) eventually happens, because if this place properly addresses those items in a transparent manner then it would definitely be a room I would consider backing players in the future. That debate will not happen in this thread.

All the best.

Having a certified RNG might help too.

The problem with much of what you are saying against "riggies" is none of us have claimed the site is rigged against us. Isn't that the classic online poker is rigged debate? All of us do have one similarity in our claims. We claim the software and RNG on Global is not working in the same way that an RNG on ANY and EVERY other site we've ever played on.

It's assumed we are losing players and also assumed we all believe online poker as a whole is rigged. That isn't the case. You continue to ask us for proof. Do you(or anyone else) have proof that what we are saying isn't accurate?
We aren't able to download hands into a replayer or holdem manager or poker tracker for Global Poker. It's not possible to show graphs or data at the moment. But guess what? Global still doesn't have a certified RNG.

Would you enter any other sweepstakes if the company or person running it couldn't prove it was actually random? I'd have to imagine you wouldn't.

The hand was KK vs 89 on K892 no flush draw for the 89. So no it was not a 50/50 chance of the guy winning.

Agreed, though this never does anything to make riggies more comfortable, they just assume the certification agency is in on it, or that the rooms turn on and off a switch when inspected.

Nah, only the bad beat whiner riggies insist on being the main character of the poker universe. Most riggies however go with a general "the cards are not dealt properly" approach, whether it is a compare it with what you see live, or in this case a belief that "sweepstakes" is the cause. The problem of course is that the hand output would easily prove this, and riggies never show that type of data. At best they say the results are as expected because the rig is hidden "in the variance" whatever that means.

If the hands are not being dealt properly that would be very easy to prove. That is not a matter of belief, it is just statistics.

Well, the every hand is a 50/50 or the gutshot dude are likely degens and losing players just due to the nature of their posts, but that is not really the point.

You are doing the standard disprove a negative approach used by riggies, and that is not how proof works. You are saying the RnG is not proper and by default the cards are not being dealt in a proper way. That is easy to prove, just do a proper verifiable statistical analysis of the output.

Trying to disprove a specific riggie theory is a waste of time, because they will just come up with a new one.

People have found workarounds for this on pretty much every site. Odds are some of your opponents have decent databases of hands of your play.

For what it is worth, as I said I do think saved hand histories are a very important feature that needs to be implemented (though not for riggie concerns, more to help detect collusion and bots), but even if hands were saved that would not change the beliefs or claims of anyone in this thread.

That depends. I ran a casino bonus whoring team years ago and while most of the rooms we played on were solid we did choose some that were definitely not as stable because the rewards were massive. Some we got in and out of just before they shut down, and in the end it was basically a math play.

I already said that I would not back players on this room as is, but not because of the riggie silliness. They would at least need to put saved hands (without using third party methods) for that to be considered.

The prove it isn't random claim that you guys cling to does not concern me as much because I know if it was not random then someone would have proven it by now. That happened all the time in the online casino industry, here is a rogue list for you to enjoy

https://www.casinomeister.com/rogue-casinos/


That is the difference between us, I know the power of statistics and I also know there are a ton of people out there capable of using them. If there is a problem then they will discover it with actual data, not riggie beliefs and speculation.

All the best.

That's exactly what happened with my KK vs 98 on K982 (no flush draw lol) example. That's why I was very clear before providing it that the rub here was that all hands had an equal % to win at the time they were all in. Because the notion is ridiculous and a single simple hand example proves it so.

After this hand example the rig immediately changed to being a predetermined winner. Shocker.

FWIW I also agree that RNG certification needs to get completed as soon as reasonably possible. And agree with you Monteroy it will do nothing to change the notions ITT. It's important none the less.

You never posted the hand just what you remembered. The reason. It's 50/50 or predetermined is because it's not poker but a sweepstakes drawing. The idea that it isnt really poker but a sweepstakes drawing is lost on you

You are so dumb it's becoming embarrassing. The hand was 100% for the guy with KK, that's how the hand happened. I've had hands as well where I was 100% on the flop/turn. How are these hands still ****ing 50/50 in your mind is unreal. Come up with a new rig theory because this one has been disproven unless the site is sending the pot to the losing hand half the time.

Which means what exactly? I'm remembering it wrong? Is it 50/50 or predetermined or some melding of both? Maybe the RNG determines if any random hand will be either 50/50 or predetermined?

As soon as the whole thing shifted from 50/50 to predetermined winners, someone asked what happens when the predetermined winner folds? I think they said does the universe explode? lol I don't recall seeing an answer to the question though.

Let me provide the only logical answer for you. There must be a secondary predetermined winner, should the 1st one fold. Then a 3rd in case both fold. Etc. Does that sound reasonable

Now let's perform a thought experiment. You can actually do this at home but it's not necessary it's easy enough to visualize. I take a deck of cards, shuffle, and deal out 9 hold'em hands face up. Then I deal out the board and see which one wins. It just so happens that this hand the T4o won when it made a full house as the board was 49QT4. This hand could be said to have been the predetermined winner from the shuffle (the RNG that were my hands) that the T4o would be the winning hand. Had they folded to a preflop raise however then the KJo would have won with a straight, which was the secondary predetermined winner. If the KJo had folded to the preflop raise however then AA would have taken it down instead of finishing in 3rd place.

I can then gather up the cards and as soon as I finish shuffling and cutting the deck, the next winner is now again predetermined by the way the deck lies, and the only possible way to circumvent that predetermined winner is through a wagering process that causes the next "T4o" to fold before reaching showdown.

So yes, I'm having trouble distinguishing the predetermined winner theory from a "real poker game". It seems to me the best and easiest way to randomly set these predetermined winners lists each hand is to use an RNG that provides a random shuffle and deal each hand.

Montery; lets clear up some things as you clearly do not understand.

Statistical Data

Neither side has statistical data to present because it is not possible. The HH they do show is incomplete. You never see all of the participants hands, and you are only guaranteed of seeing hole cards on hands all in before the river. Even hands that go all in and called on the river are not guaranteed, and not likely shown, in the HH. Without the hole cards displayed, you can only gather a sample of hands all in prior to the river to analyze. This nowhere represents the game as a whole. Therefore, to say this would be easy to prove with stats, it would be not easy to prove as every player in every hand would have to be messaged to find out what they had for every hand. You would literally have to have each individuals HH in your possession, and then match up the hands from each participants HH to a database to complete each individual hand. Yes in theory, this is possible, but it would take months to complete. And BTW, because you cannot download HH, you would have to have access to each players account to review their HH.

In short, if it were possible to show data, we would should data, but it is not possible to show data, because the data is not downloadable and not complete. So maybe you missed this or did not understand this, but I need for you to stop saying the point is invalid because there it no real statistical data to back it up. No one is saying the statistical data is backing their claims up.

Riggies

I am not saying the game is rigged. To imply it is rigged is to imply the operator, Global Poker, is doing something unethical. Lets be clear, they are not rigging the game in any way. There are some posts in this thread where individuals on both sides of the discussion are getting things wrong. Case in point is the KK vs 98 hand. I will explain (according to my theory):

If the game were truly a sweepstakes game as asserted, the point prior to the flop, but after both participants had completed pre-flop betting and the action was closed is the point the random sweepstakes winner is chosen. It is at this point they both have a 50/50 chance to win the pot, and the 50/50 chance exists for the entire hand independent of what the computer simulated board shows. Once the winner is determined, a computer simulated program produces a flop, turn, and river designed around the pre-determined winner of the hand. Some individuals posted that the winner is selected at the all-in point. This is not correct. The random winner has to be selected once all participants in the sweepstakes is determined.

Therefore, this is not an argument of rigging a board or game, this is an argument that what you see that looks like a real poker game is actually a highly sophisticated computer sweepstakes game designed to look like a real poker game. While easy to prove through statistics, not possible to prove under current conditions. (See above)

So name calling individuals as riggers is completely unacceptable, as you are trying to place a negative term on individuals in an effort to discredit them when you cannot produce any data or evidence to support your position.


Sweepstakes Get Around

This discussion of this thread is about the 'sweepstakes get around'. I have presented information for individuals to review to come to their own conclusions. I have on more than one occasion asked for specific information from those on the other side to provide proof of their claim; however, not one person has provided any of the easy to obtain information if it were available. The information we have, is all we have to debate this point.

The point that has not been discussed at all, is that when I pointed out how in their Sweeps Rules that in the event of a disqualification a winner will be selected at random. (At random! What poker room/site selects a player at random. Oh! We have a disqualification in a WSOP tournament so we are going to select a random winner. Really!) Sorry for the sarcasm.

Individuals state they place a lot of trust in their lawyers in their due diligence to produce a legal real US money poker game based upon a sweepstakes model. Now those same individuals are saying these lawyers 'copied and pasted' the terms and condition and sweeps rules from their other site. (Really!) Or they say the T&C are weak (Really!) So which is it, are they fully competent, or all they morons. The answer is: they are fully competent, and they know exactly what they are doing. The T&C and sweeps rules are completely accurate, and they are fully what they intended to establish for this game. The T&C and Sweeps Rules completely support the sweepstakes game they are producing at Global Poker, and that is exactly what it is, a sweepstakes game.

So in short, they are not saying the game is not a sweepstakes. They are calling it a sweepstakes. They are not claiming to offer real US money poker. They are claiming individuals can play a poker 'game' where they can win real cash. Their T&C and Sweeps Rules support a sweepstakes game, and do not support a true poker game in any way. So this debate is about the sweepstakes poker Global poker is offering.

Some want you to believe that by having virtual currency, the game is now classified as a sweepstakes and therefore, legal in the US as a sweepstakes. Evidence has been presented to dispute this. Others, like myself, want individuals to believe this is actually a true sweepstakes game. Can I say with 100% certainty that this is a sweepstakes game as I have described it, NO!, but we all know it is a sweepstakes game in some fashion. The question at debate is what manner of fashion is this a sweepstakes game.

(Them stating they will select a winner at random is very strong evidence of the actual game being a completely random winner as chance is a critical component of the legal sweepstakes game. Without chance, the game would move to a Contest game in the eyes of the US.)

So to you Monteroy, Please stop the name calling and post dissemination, and present the evidence you have to support you position. This issue is important to the poker community. Either this is a real poker game and they have somehow found some magical way around it when organizations larger that them have failed to do so. Or indeed, this is a true sweepstakes game designed to look like poker that they call a 'poker game' to deceive real poker players. I'm on the side where they are offering a completely legal sweepstakes game, and poker players are being deceived into thinking it is a real poker game. They are committing no crime, they only have poker players deceived right now. I have stated my mission to educate people as being the sole purpose of these post, and none of my post represent anything other than information for individuals to make informed decisions.

Again, as my disclaimer, Global Poker is offering completely legal sweepstakes game for US customers. It is fun to play, and you can win some real money playing this game.

Basically all that needs to be said.

I understand your point that all poker hands are pre-determined based upon the shuffle of the hand and the order of the cards in the deck. The issue is that according to the US government, this pre-determined winner scenario does no conform to the rules of a legal sweepstakes. The winner of the sweepstakes must be randomly chosen so all participants have an equal chance of winning. The cards can have no actual effect on the winner of a sweepstakes contest. Games where cards control how the outcome of the winner is determined are classified differently, and do not meet the standard and rules for legal US sweepstakes games.

Your point is well taken and understood, and I see how this is something that is very confusing as your argument is true; however, as it this type of pre-determined winner that does not make it qualify for a legal US sweepstakes.

To your point about folding, folding participants are voluntarily exiting the sweepstakes. I am not going to speak with any degree of certainty on this, as this is where they spent a great deal of time of developing a new and exciting format they could use based upon poker and still met the standards for a legal sweepstakes.

You seem to think your manifestos are difficult to understand. They are very, very, VERY easy to understand, but they are all based on your unqualified opinion of the scenario, nothing more.

No doubt there are workarounds, and how about this - if the statistical data existed (assuming they put in saved hands) that showed the deal was within statistical expectations - would that in any way, shape or form change your outlook? The answer is no, because you are obsessed with your personal agenda and reality is secondary to that.



Other rooms have a similar restriction in place and people have created workarounds to get the data. Many sites try to put in restrictions for datamining hands, and yet people find ways around that and datamine hands.

In the end though it does not matter, because your beliefs would not change regardless of the data.

No, it suggests that the deal is not random. Many riggies toss out theories that have the site not involved. Most make the sites no money and the rig as suggested accomplishes nothing, but that does not stop the belief in it.

You have said multiple times that the game is not dealt in a proper random manner, which means the deal is rigged.

You continue to say that is exactly what they are doing, such as the following from the same post


That is a definition of a "rig." The silly thing is as has been said many times - this would be a very easy rig to exploit for huge profit as well, which brings back the original question of why you and others don't simply do that and make millions.

A nice simple way to exploit it. All trash hands shove preflop for 100BBs on cash tables. Most times you will get all folds and pick up the blinds. If you get called then who cares - you are 50/50. Repeat 100 times, and if you get 30 calls then you will win 15 of those and lose 15 of those while the other 70 hands you pick up 1.5 blinds. You don't even need to do it with trash hands, just shove every hand - 100% VPIP 100% PFR for the win!

Cha ching...

One of the dumbest rigs ever, but you need to believe in it, and nothing will change that belief.

I would never call a riggie a rigger...


Carry on with your quest, and perhaps you can add you opinions about the melting temperature of steel...


All the best.

Monterey; once again post dissemination with nothing to support your position. So let's take this in baby steps for you

Answer how exactly you can obtain an appropriate size of sample data to analyze given the HH conditions at Global Poker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It does not matter as the data would not change your opinion.

You ignored the simple way I told you to exploit this room if your beliefs are true, simply shove every hand. You pay a little rake when called (and you will win 50% of the time so that is 0 EV when called less the rake), and more than make up for it with the 1.5 blinds you get every time you are not called.

Get a team to have a player on every table doing that and let the money roll in. Oh and by the way if you do this (obviously you will not as either you hate money or lack faith in your beliefs) all you have to do is record every hand when called and build up a nice sample of 100-200 all-ins, which should not take too long.

If you win 50% of all-ins when shoving any 2 every hand (and will generally be called by stronger hands), and you can show this in a sample of 100-200 then you are definitely on to something. Just stream the play (and be sure to let people know of the stream in advance) when you do it so there is a record of it.

There you go - a very, VERY simple way for you to get all the data you need in a verifiable manner in a relatively short period of time, and the best part is if your beliefs are true you will make a nice amount of money showing this!

Ball is in your court, feel free to avoid it how you like .

All the best.


P.S. Dumbest rig ever...

If you cannot answer the question then do not waste our time. Do not present some theory or argument you have. Answer the question!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I actually did . I showed you how to make easy money with your rig, and how to test it and get the data you need in a verifiable manner to prove it, even without the ability to save the hands on your hard drive. I don't believe in it so I will not be spewing at the table based on your false belief. Obviously you are too afraid to test it as well, because you know it is a pile of junk . Game over at this point, but you can keep swinging away as you see fit, even after being so easily exposed.

Dumbest rig ever...

All the best.

Wordy and eloquent, just not factual.

A sweepstakes is a winner chosen at random, yes? How advanced is the software that it can know what the human interactions will be down the board? If the winner was predetermined than I want my $60+ for being timed out on the turn with 7s full yesterday afternoon. The sweepstakes take place in Chumba Casino, not Global Poker. The virtual currency takes place in Global Poker and there are no laws against virtual currency in a contained environment. It is why coinbase and other ewallets exist with no current fear of federal prosecution. The day the RAWA were to be passed, all the virtual currency sites would have the federal emblem and 'seized' on their homepage. ClubWPT, the fantasy sports sites, etc... all use virtual currency as their go around and they are based in the US. Even when the Silk Road case went down, there was no prosecution on the basis of or connected to the virtual currency. It was for trafficking and laundering, predominantly. The virtual currency is what allows them to operate in the US.

The argument that PS would do it if it was that easy is wrong and shows lack of knowledge on the topic. They have already been under indictment with the US regulators and agreed to stay out of the US to continue their operations. They would be going back on an agreement of operating without a license and that would most certainly send a lot of officers off to prison. Other networks voluntarily opted out of the US markets. The assumption that they somehow found a way to do enter the US market while other larger more established networks haven't is folly. It really isn't that hard to see.

You have to make outside parallels in order to have a logic conclusion. Various real money betting and card playing sites exist and are domiciled in the US using the sweepstakes model. ClubWPT discusses their RNG in the T&C. Two other networks using Cuebia software discuss RNG in their T&C. The designer of the software discusses the inclusion of an RNG into the software several years back. VGW uses Cuebia software, connecting the dots is not too difficult of a task here. While it is not 100% proof that it isn't even a total scam, let alone sweepstakes or not, it is 100 times more logical than the conclusion of it being a pre-chosen winner based on a convoluted, secretive study of a random selection of hands and conflating Chumba Casino as being the same as Global Poker or having a hunch that something is off. Occam's Razor and all.

There is no way corporate counsel is writing the T&C for a website, zero chance of that. The T&C is done by in-house compliance in accord with business plan and legal opinion. The fact that Global has a line stating that the biggest prize is 5K when they have had pots won for bigger than that would negate that and seems that their T&C is in need of editing. Unless their opinion is the monetary value of the sweeps cash used to play the game having a total value of less than the $5K. If that is the case, they should add something about it being sweeps cash and not 'prize'. Either way, their T&C need clarification. If it is a prize pre-determined, give me my money from the pot I was timed out on.

There is inarguable proof that sweepstakes games formulae/models are used as a go around to engage in betting, wagering, or real money poker online in the US. If you really want to know what the story is, just call their US attorneys and ask.