my roi on stars: could never break 6%

my roi on full tilt over 300 games 17%

gee I guess I must have learned how to play poker overnight

BBV forum is that way ------->

ANOTHER great point.

The websites are not consistent. Players report losing on one site and winning on another. How could this be?? Especially on the two top sites (PS and FT) the play-field is very similar there shouldn't be such inconsistencies.

What do you think the probability of:

1- One of you top 10 films being on TV tonight
2- You receiving an email from your sister/brother
3- You eating a curry for lunch
4- There being a dog barking outside your house

All in the same day!! That probability is very very low! Yet it's a perfectly normal thing.

I don't know about the doomswitch, but I can see the banhammer coming down soon! Jagnje is already taking up YOUR challenge! Do you have anything else other than cherrypicked graphs that you've found on the net?

lol A+

the "muppet"

Seriously I can see that you've ignored the criticism you've received after posting that fgators graph. You really had no clue what you were posting did you? Just admit it. So since you realize your credibility was all shot to hell you just keep coming on and posting more EV graphs?

Yep, the banhammer is coming soon I'm sure. I'll bet the majority of people whose graphs you're posting don't even think the games are rigged. It's called running bad and it happens to every serious poker player at some point.

So when are you going to provide your HH's and specify how you think the site is screwing you so that we can actually get the evidence you need if you want to stand a snowballs chance in hell of gaining the tiniest smidgen of credibility?

Maybe you should learn about sample sizes overnight.

That, and other variables. But we don't want to make it too complicated right away...

Newbie riggedologists. Many before you have claimed much crazier things without showing their actual hand histories as proof, even quadrillion to 1 type events like 17 AA hands losing in a row.

Get with the program. Lie bigger or do not lie at all.

Wow dude, I mean seriously...WTF? I mean dude, what good do you do? What do you do for this poker forum at all? Why are you credible enough to be a spokesman for the general public? I'm serious, you and QPW do nothing but troll this thread to critisize and belittle anything anybody says negative about online poker. I really personally think you have other motives and agenda's here. What if somebody did come here and post credible evidence, you would say the same thing over and over again and steer them off...so we'd never know.

Anyways...Another serious question....RNG: Random Number Generator;

Who generates or operates the "RNG" for a pokersite? Is it contracted out? Is it done internally? Does each poker site use the "same RNG" from the same developers? Does each site create their own "RNG."

Although I partially agree that they're somewhat trolls (although not compared to Sooperfish and to a slightly lesser extent R4R), I really don't think they would.

The thing is, nobody has posted any credible, well organized evidence that online poker is rigged.

I do. I like to see if I can make paranoid people even more paranoid. Proving to be much less difficult then expected. Go figure.

Once someone show verifiable, credible evidence I will be the first to scream as well about the room in question.

A new poster posting made up hands from memory does not count as credible evidence, even if you take it at complete face value.

Do you believe what he said? If so, why? What credible evidence has he shown?

People have done excellent work to show bots, super users, colluders etc in the past using valid statistical methods as proof. I applaud their work and others that make the play environment better for us all.

Losing players who whine about bad beats and think the world is rigged against them? They are just there for amusement value as I see it.

Although, maybe something more sinister and darker is actually at work...

All the best

I agree 100%

i'm not a troll i am a martyr. lol.

What type of "evidence" are you looking for? People running way under expected value in huge samples obviously doesn't do it - so what will??

What good does some idiot sharing exaggerated bad beat stories do? If somebody did come here and post credible evidence, that evidence would change the entire tone of the discussion. But they don't. They never do. Get a clue.

ONCE AGAIN, you dummys keep yelling EVIDENCE!EVIDENCE!EVIDENCE!....

WHAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THAT WOULD BE CONCRETE PROOF TO YOU THAT OP IS RIGGED?

I bet you cannot answer that question, can you.

Care to share with us your thoughts on the fgators graph you posted? A good solid analysis as to how you think it's rigged?

Or are you going to be like K13, claim one thing, get proven wrong, and just ignore it so you can go on with your trolling.

State a theory as to how it is rigged and then obtain data and analyze it in a verifiable, proper mathematical manner to prove your theory. Your method of cherry picking graphs without any actual context or data that suit your needs and clear agenda is not a proper method of analysis.

If you really want to do an actual proper study, go to the probability forum and ask for suggestions how to conduct it. I say that of course knowing you will never choose that course, but technically it is an answer to your question at least.

Probably the only serious post I will direct at you since I realize it is basically a waste of time, so do with those basic suggestions as you wish before you get banned again.

All the best.

Blunder - I don't think that is applicable since there are literally thousands of potential combinations of random life events. Sure those things could happen.

In a finite environment on 1 or 2 (heads or tails) we see some type of a favoring issue here. You would be talking about those things happening multiple times in a row.

I hate this consiracy theory garbage, but I am just relating what happened. If someone can publish something contrary for me to review I am happy to do it.

Several people have answered this question, idiot. You ignore them. So much so that another guy who thinks poker is rigged is going to submit his sample of hand histories for review while you continue on with your constant bs.

Provide a large sample of your hand histories. Tell us going in what you think is rigged about it. Let other people who play on the same site test for the same things in order to broaden the sample size. At least make a friggin effort, for god's sake. You have brought nothing to this debate. Anybody whining about rigged poker should be doing something to analyze an unbiased sample of hands. As mentioned before, cherrypicking only the samples that you have found surfing through BBV don't count.

Hardware RNG's are simple devices that measure the stochastic electrical activity (noise) of a resistor or similar component and derive a number from it. These things (typically made by Intel) have been certified to an extremely high standard.

Believe me, if you wanted to rig the deal you would NOT try to 'rig' the RNG. It would be all but impossible and infinitely easy simply to ignore the RNG output and card generation and subsitute the card you required.

What is it with you, you moron?

This question has been answered several times and you just ignore it.

I really hate to see people asking for others to be banned but you are such a witless clown that it really is going to come to that soon.

For God's sake, get psychiatric help before you do something really stupid.