You obviously don't.

Burden I think most people's (many peoples?) 2+2 time is devided between learning in the strat forums (whether posting or lurking) and then passing time in the more entertainment/general poker world knowledge threads. Some people post in BBV4L, or the politics forum, etc. Others get involved with threads like these. I have a high stress desk job where I need mental breaks: so I hit refresh on my subscribed threads page and if nothing interesting there I browse the forums.

Here's the thing, most of these so-called shills have actually encouraged the rigtards to perform more rigourous analysis of their handhistories to see if something iffy is going on. Some have provided detailed posts on how to do an effective analysis. Is this some devilish reverse psychology where the shills think: I really don't want them to do this research so if we tell them how to do it, they'll think its too hard and won't bother?

Many of the "shills" you're probably referring to have participated in other threads focussing on wrongdoing of sites, and been critical of the site - is that because its one of the other sites that was paying them, so they slag the rest?

If this thread actually did give light to a true rigged site you'd see those same posters spending even more time trying to bring those sites down.

Provide some real evidence of rigging and prove me wrong!

Where do you get the notion that the people on 'rigtard' debunking duty don't get tired or sick of the thread?

There are several people on this thread who spend time pointing out the flaws in rigtard arguments and then get tired and take a break.

Some come back and some don't.

The problem is that there is a never ending supply of poor poker players who will not take responsibility for their own inadequacies, blame their bad play on the site and and become 'tards here.

yeah that's thing. anyone would get sick and tired of it but yet they are always in here defending defending defending like they are English knights and the integrity of online poker is the king of England or maybe more like a gang of villains in a scrolling video game that auto pop-up as soon as your character steps in the labyrinth.

maybe it's not so crazy that you guys would get some kind of enjoyment out of it. I mean I used to have a hell of a good time arguing about politics with a group of people that were clueless on the subject. But then again politics is such a more varied subject. I mean you guys are in here making the same arguments just tirelessly. It is only natural to question your motivation at some point.

I take it English language comprehension is not your strong point?

I just explained that people don't keep it up for ever. The rigtard debunkers change over time.

Why would the arguments change?

Rigtards come up with the same tired old rubish and the answers don't change.

Rather like being in a beginners forum (any topic) and having to explain the same misconceptions over and over again.

And some people keep that up for years.

It's natural for a commited rigtard because there's nowhere else for them to go.

Their ill thought out theories are debunked and when they make outlandish statements, evidence is requested.

These people are not the sharpest knives in the drawer and when their crapola is exposed the only thing left for them is to lash out and make wild accusations about those who are thwarting their attempts to lay the blame for their own failure at the door of the poker sites.

As I've said before:

A rigtard is someone who believes sites are definitely rigged despite there being no evidence that is the case.

A rigtard debunker is someone who believes sites are probably not rigged because there is no evidence that is the case.

See dude this is the **** that makes me sick. What is wrong w/ you? Seriously. If you ran your country and somebody told you Russia was about to launch nukes at us, would this be your theme? It's the way you respond and answer a lot of these users w/ such enthusiasm. Over a year later, your still at it? I've made my comments but you don't see me replaying the same record over and over again like you....John Denver?

Debunk?! It's a business not a phenom.

I suppose this gibberish makes sense to you.

The 'debunking' is of the daft theories that you and your fellow idiot-boy rigtards are forever propounding.

I haven't said anything "rigtarded" in a while...funny, I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion.
The gibberish doesn't make sense b/c your not here to help anybody in the poker community or on this forum.

Lets say when Poker first opened it's doors, and they had the attitude you had, would you play there? Have you met the operators of Poker sites personally? You seem to uphold their integrity like they were appointed by the Vatican...

I haven't been reading this thread for a while.

You are fundamentally unable to marshal your thoughts in a way that enables you to explain them to others.

Wat?

ROFLMAO.

You think it's part of the papal remit to grant licences to on-line gaming operators?

Your seem to believe that sites are definitely rigged despite there being no evidence that is the case.

I believe sites are probably not rigged because there is no evidence that is the case.


So, to answer your question, I would have played there cautiously and examined any supposed evidence of malfeasance with the correct mathematical and statistical tools.

tk, why do you think most people respond to you negatively in this forum? Not just in this thread, but others that you post in? Is it because everyone is a shill or do you think that perhaps you appear hostile at times and don't have the intellect to carry hostility off very well? Sometimes a little introspection and a little less denial can do a lot of good.

Yes, this is another big red flag.
I can say that there have been a few guys who are willing to be constructive. One of them even openly admits to working for Pstars. I hear you on this though...

Tk, you know that QPW has actually offered to analyze people's handhistories to look for irregularities. He's made numerous posts in this thread for ways to test for riggedness. Despite this, I know of only one poster who took him up on this and apparently there was nothing amiss in the sample (since the poster stopped posting in this thread I'm assuming he accepted the results). Now, maybe again QPW is some master reverse psychologist shill who when he does get the handhistories "rigs" the results to hide the riggedness, but otherwise its fair to say he's offered a substantial amount to this forum.

You don't seem to refute his point, but rather his tone, which is kind of silly in an internet forum.

I am sure that the RNG at a site could pass inspection. That doesnt mean that the programming isnt working around a perfectly good RNG to shave a few percentages here and there. Bottom line is that you shouldnt play if you dont trust the sites. I am kind of stuck in the middle at this point because I am not sure if there is rigging going on at the sites that I play, so I am doing some research to see if I can get off of the fence post.

Only if you're an idiot.

IF there were people here posting stuff such as: "it's OK, there's nothing to worry about, x site is as safe as houses, just keep playing there", then you might have a point.

But that's not the case.

The rigtard debunkers are posting reasoned argument to counter the irrational theories that rigtards come up with or requesting evidence for anything the rigtards state as facts or likely facts.

The two types of response are quite different and no intelligent person would confuse logical argument and the requirement of evidence before condemnation with shilling.

The sites provide people with a means of making some money, sat at home, playing an online game. People appreciate this service and defend the sites who provide it against mindless accusations from morons. Why is this difiicult to understand?

He'd probably ask for some corroborative evidence. Would you prefer him to say "yeah I've always thought those Russians were a bit dodgy and they could nuke us. I have no proof they're going to but lets nuke them first to be safe"

Damn. Owned!

Actually, I think the person who provided the histories was quite genuine.

When he saw the results he seemed to accept that he'd been a little unlucky but not in any way that indicated there was anything amiss (at least at that sample size).

Why wouldn't he?

Because he might be part of an international plot to steal money from American players to fund terrorism overseas. That would be a good reason not to...

LOL! just kidding...

My thoughts

Poker stars:
MTCT-25%Rigged in chip stack favour
cash games-20%rigged depends on opponents
heads-up cash game-25% rigged depends on opponents
Sng's-10% rigged

Satellite's -not rigged

Rigged site standing's

poker stars
Fulltilt
partypoker
absolute
Absolute is defenitly least rigged
but ofcourse superusing is worst.

btw.I have played significant amount of hands
on all these sites and I AM A 2BB winner across sites
at my stakes.

My thoughts:

That somehow never gets old, despite the fact that I know it's going to be there.

It's for when a post is so incredibly stupid it doesn't even deserve a thought out response. Saves time.

Just over a year ago, I wouldn`t have entertained the notion that it was rigged. That was until I won a seat at the WSOP ME through Europoker,owned by Bwin.

It was a fantastic experience culminating in a decent payday for me. Having qualified for the princely sum of $3, I was suitably chuffed at landing a $25K lift. I`m not the greatest player in the world but can hold my own fairly well at the tables.

My friend accompanied me on the near three week visit to Vegas and I must say, the hospitality package from Bwin was superb. They don`t hold back on the goodies!

Anyway, to get to the point. My friend and I became friendly with one of the Bwin employees and we chatted regularly covering any and every subject under the sun. During one of the conversations my friend asked the Bwin guy if there was any "rigging" going on. At the time his reply didn`t bother me as I took it as a bit of a wind up. His actual quote. "It`s designed to reward brave calls". He seemed very matter of fact about it at the time and over time his comment has bitten deep into me to the point I found it hard to know if what he said was truth or fib.

What bothers me the most is that it tarnished my winning of the package I won. Did I really win it or was I aided by programming? As mentioned at first it didn`t bother me but as time has gone by it has forced me to evaluate myself and online poker. Although I haven`t won as much this year I still have the comfort of winning the 10k on Ipoker and a free seat at the GUKPT in London earlier this year. I also switched to playing far more live games recently, just to prove to myself I can play.My first visit to the casino yielded a victory for £690 in a £25er tourney along with various cashes and a more than fair percentage of final table appearances since. I am also regaining my feet online and growing in confidence again weekly.

In short, his reply was like one of those hypnotic "power of suggestion" comments that really shook my belief and severely curtailed my enthusiasm and confidence in the online game. Gladly, I`m feelng much more confident again and teaching myself PLO at the micro rings(my way "back in"). I really wish I hadn`t been there for that convo though. I`m actually a very strong character and deeply shocked that such a glib comment could affect me as much as it did.

Happily, I`m convinced online is not rigged but do understand fully and can sympathise with those who think it is. Educating oneself and re-discovering the game is probably what`s required for most people.

This can be proved through hand history analysis. Do it.