The problem with all these rigging "theories" is that it would be trivial to prove that it is happening. Simply compare the X # of hands of a player after they cash out with all other hands. If there is a curse, there should be an anomaly in the data. Any rigging apparent to a player would stick out like a sore thumb to decent statistical analysis.

If the anomaly is too small to detect due to rigging only running some of the time, then it would the pointless to have a "doom switch" with statistically insignificant results on the cards.

For example, any algorithm that increases the chances of an event occurring by even 1% will be detectable with enough data. And even if there is one that is undetectable, the result on a poker site's bottom line is so small to take the risk.

So, in conclusion:

A) If rigging exists, then it's too small to detect.
B) If it's too small to detect, then it's insignificant to a poker site's bottom line.
C) If there's no significant benefit to rigging, then there's no point in doing so, since any proof of such will cause a lot more damage to the company than any potential profits.

Regarding losing after cashing out:

I also tend to lose money after cashing out. I figure it's because I cash out after I run good for a while. When I start running good, I start picking up bad habits, which cause me to lose money after I cash out.

[quote]
FYI realjaydub, there's an Edit button if you want to add additional content to your posts.

[/qoute]

Right on. I hate to use it because people tend to believe you changed ur post all together. *meh*

No one is claiming that it is not rigged beyond a shadow of a doubt.

No one has claimed that it is impossible for stars to be rigged.

In fact, in my first post in this thread, I said that "of course, it is theoretically possible" that Stars is rigged. However, there is no evidence to support believing that stars is rigged; therefore, I do not believe stars is rigged.

Actually now that I really think about it, I don't think I've ever experienced an immediate downswing after withdrawing. BTW I've played (and deposited/withdrawn) on all of these sites/networks: PokerStars, FTP, Prima, Cryptologic, iPoker, and Mansion.

****
Well, unless there is some reason to doubt PokerStars, yes, we should just take their word for it. Why is that unreasonable? josem*****


When China sells the US dog food and claims it's dog food, whould we just believe them or should we have it tested especially if there is doubt it IS dog food? Let's not be a total douche tard, show us proof, it shouldn't be that hard.

In addition, any rigging that was done like this would also not be detectable by humans playing the game.

The brainwashing is working, good for josem.

You're joking right?


SNG's are the easiest way to see riggedness.

Logical arguments = brainwashing?

Logical?

You're trying to sell yourself the same line that's been said by online nutthuggers.

I know you didn't come up with that on your own.

Do you really believe once you hit your cash out button you all of the sudden start playing like crap?

No.

Are you seriously doubting that is impossible for a human brain in real time to provide better statistical analysis over hundreds of thousands of instances than a PC? Like, honestly...

...and how is that?

As you'll recall from our last thread (where you ignored what I wrote and made a serious of quite offensive implications about criminal threads - much like this one) I've played thousands of SNGs. I've never seen any proof that SNGs are rigged in that.

Um... firstly, I'm not "selling" myself anything. I'm very confident there's no [censored] rigging. Secondly, as I said in my other posts, I've never had a downswing right after withdrawing, and I've played on multiple sites.

EDIT: I suppose I'm simply immune to the curse, right? Or I'm all the sites' lucky 500,000th player so I don't have a DOOMED account?

Then you clearly were not paying attention.

I've played thousands and thousands of sngs and the riggedness would often help myself. I was in the mode, if it isn't me....then I'm not going to worry about it.


The chip leader 9/10 times would suckout so bad for runner runner it was literally hilarious.

Well, sure, if you want to doubt it, you should feel free to test it. Doesn't bother me - but don't claim that it is not dog food until you bring some proof with you.

Ur not? Did I pick up the wrong qoute?

"I also tend to lose money after cashing out. I figure it's because I cash out after I run good for a while. When I start running good, I start picking up bad habits, which cause me to lose money after I cash out. "

Where's that number from?

Okay looks like I got you and Lyrrad confused in qoutes.

My apologies.

Same place the RNG test results are from.

which is what?

You tell me.

hey the NBA is/was rigged... why not stars?

I'll have you test it for me before I feed it to my dogs.

You do know the US recieved tainted dog food that killed and made a lot of dogs sick from China, right?

Exactly, and the NBA isn't programmed by humans either....

I will:

http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/rng/

BMM International and Cigital, Inc.
http://www.bmm.com.au/
http://www.cigital.com/

I can't find anywhere where they say anything remotely close to:

'cause there's no proof that stars is rigged?


since i'm not a follower of the nba, i don't know this, but i assume that there was some evidence at sometime to support your claim that it was rigged.