That's only looking at preflop equities, which is a flawed way of looking at how you're running unless you were all-in preflop.

actually, if you rig it, it won't win that often. that's how you can tell whether or not it's legit.

Also K13 I'm still awaiting your database screenshots.

Your post is ******ed and I was hoping you were too and were trying to get you to play on PokerStars where I do, but I have failed.

Honest to ****ing god, dude:

Beats, Brags, and Variance

This isn't your personal blog of your selected bad beats. They prove nothing, and just make all the rest of the people on here trying to argue with some logic (emphasis on trying) look worse by association.

I just noticed "Location: Canada", which I don't recall seeing before. While it makes me sad to see a compatriot making a fool of himself here, it also makes me wonder, WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING???

You think Stars is rigged, and then your next choice is super-shady Cereus. You can play on just about any poker site on the Internet, and you choose one you're convinced is rigged and one that has admitted to allowing super users. There are tonnes of sites that are as soft or softer, that have as good or better bonus/VIP/rakeback programs, yet you play at those two sites.

Last thing, there is no such word as ****en. Do you mean ****ing? Or ****in'? I've seen you type it probably a few hundred times now (all in relation to another one of your lame bad beat stories, LDO), so I thought you might like to know.

Full. Oh, chit, wait, that's going to be three words. Cake. Eff, nope, that's gonna be two words. Pokerstars? Hey, yup, that's one word.

Seriously? Full Tilt, and it's not even close.

I just got here, and at first I thought maybe this thread might have belonged on its own:

But then we got into this:

So yeah, a merge it is.

I can see this is going to be a completely unbiased study.

Someone send me a copy of PT cause my trial version expired, is there any free program I can use to upload my hand histories?

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch?e=200902210639326

Aces come on the board way too often on PS. Espacially when 2 or 3 people have an ace already.

Check your datebases yourself.

are you kidding? put your HH's in a folder, zip them and use like YouSendIt.com or something.

Sending you a free copy of PT would be illegal. There is no reason why anyone who plays as many hands as you do shouldn't invest in such a ridiculously +EV piece of software. Do you keep a spreadsheet to track your winnings and losses?

First off, just in case you were curious using a bunch of big words doesnt make you any smarter.

You seem to have a problem understanding that RNG means anything can happen. Showing two card sets logically cannot prove that the RNG is flawed.

In fact, if you understand that RNG means that it is RANDOM, much like a coin flip, you would realize that you could see the exact hand 40 times in a row without any flaws in the RNG.

You muppet, a data set was published in this thread a few pages ago which precisely disproved this idiotic assertion.

In actual fact, aces slightly less often on the flop (since when there is a flop, people are more likely to have aces in their hand).

This post of yours - seeking data on flops just after it is posted - makes me believe that you're maliciously idiotic, rather than just ignorant.

BTW, the data is here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=4187

Now that you have been proven wrong on that false claim, will you admit that you were wrong?

Josem, incidentally those happen to be PS hands, showing that Aces flop (and turn and river) less than any other card, as expected due to the removal effect you described.

Well that's fine because he specifically stated PS.

QFT.

I swear I've just got done with a stretch that had me questioning everything. And I've played 50k sngs or so.

The only reason I still don't believe PS is rigged is because as a computer programmer I know how hard something like that would be to program AND keep secret, also a giant team of people to manage who gets boomed and who gets doomed, etc. Either that or complicated algorithms that someone had to set up and maintain (weekend vs. week, new player vs. old, 12-tabler vs 2-tabler, etc.). Keeping that **** under wraps as part of a computer program as complicated as a poker site, AND still balancing all the allins so that no major statistical anomalies show up would be pretty much impossible.

But it's literally been like an act of faith for me to force my reason to win out over what my gut is screaming at me as I lose set after set after set after set. I can understand where just about anyone who isn't a computer programmer or 2p2 devotee would start to question riggedness during a run like this. I don't see how you couldn't.

standard deviation + risk of losing money = good conditions for a person to believe in rigging. Personal loss will turn otherwise sensible people into irrational finger-pointers.

Are any winning players complaining about rigging?

Some of the rigtards here claim to be winning players, but conveniently they never provide screen names.

He was.



On a different note, i played 480 hands last night and cracked Aces or Kings every time i was 3bet holding a smaller pocket pair. (JJ and under)
Must be rigged, not complaining.