What stakes are you losing at online? I think most people here think 1/2 on PS/FTP is tougher than live 5/10.

So you were kidding? You seemed completely serious in your claim that you could possibly be losing due to mouse movements affecting the randomness somehow.

we've lost another one lol

It's not because you're a customer.

It's because you are an accuser.

How many time will that have to be explained to you before it sinks in?

Of course not.

Because you always audit your utility companies don't you?

You do always audit your utility companies don't you?

After all, according to your logic they have billions invested so must be cheating their customers.

tk1133, have you stopped your medication again?

You know what the nice judge said would happen if you stopped taking your prescribed medications, don't you?

Explain this to me, please. First of all, there's no way of knowing that actually was Dan Nedelko who posted the comment.

And even if it was, what gives you the idea that he is well-informed? All I get from his website is that he has been hired to help sites with their marketing. I suspect that as a player, I'm more well-informed about how a site's software is performing than any outside marketers that the site has hired. Is there something I'm missing?

Thanks! for all the answers to my post:




I am sorry to say nothing any of you wrote changed my opinion though a few comments came close or at least I had to think twice about it.

The nonsense price this takes

there should be an increase in difference between expected and actual performance


I am sure you must have misunderstood the context. Think about the probability curves for Heads and Tails where you see the two curves converge the more flips you take.
What you are saying is that more hands makes more deviation possible.

What I am saying is that with an infinity number of heads and Tails they end in 50-50 so the more flips the more likely 50-50 gets and the more suspicious you should become when u see extremes. In this case not only deviation is observed but it increases making it look like it is systematic though not impossible of course.


To sum up:


Partypoker withdraw from the US because of UIGA and it has cost them a million dollar every day since. You really think Partypoker and all the other sites can not afford legal advice?
You think they would give up millions of revenue if they had any reasonable doubt?

Pokerstars and Full Tilt ignores the law because ignoring the law makes them very rich.

Pokerstars and Full Tilt could easily ask the relevant government office whether providing poker to US customers is legal or not - but either they did, and was told it is not, or they refused to ask. It makes no difference.

Personally I think they are right to serve US customers. If people wants to play online poker then that is their choice not a matter for the government as long as independent site control is enforced.

But they break the law and it is reasonable to demand more security from sites that brakes the law than from sites that don’t. I know you Stars Loving Lizards would kill for Pokerstars but it does not change the fact that they make money - a lot of it, no tons of it - by braking the law.

If I was the CEO of Pokerstars I would say “Our legal advice tells us it is legal” cause it sounds a little better that they have been mislead by lawyers making huge fees in exchange for misleading them.


I agree that if Dan Nedlenko is for real, and is still alive, it would be extremely interesting to hear more from him. So far he said:

Many of the networks out there will monitor you and your winnings, play behaviour and adapt shuffling algorithms accordingly.

Giving the 1.000.000+ hands I have played online and all the strange EV curves over the years were - in general and with tons of hands - the red line always was higher than the blue when I was winning on a site and lower when I was losing, it suddenly made sense. Hope you are for real Dan and hope you will come forward it is almost to good to be true what you are writing.



I declare I am not paid directly or indirectly or have any economic interest in any sites apart from playing on them as a regular customer.

You're misunderstanding the law. The UIGEA was not aimed at making online gaming sites illegal, it was aimed at banks and forbade them from performing transactions with online gaming sites. This is why US players can no longer deposit/withdraw using credit cards - the banks won't process them!

PartyPoker pulled out of the US market because it is a public traded company and it caved in to pressure from it's share holders. I don't know the finer details of this unfortunately.

What I do know is that PokerStars and FTP are privately owned companies and it is the decision of the owners whether or not they continue to provide services to US players. By staying in the US market, no laws are being broken.

The reason the player to player transfer thread is so big is because US players generally have a lot harder time deposting/withdrawing than they do simply performing a player to player transfer.

Do you actually have any hard evidence of wrongdoing by anyone (who hasn't been caught yet)?

Or are you just another of those losing players who chooses to spend his time getting all of a fuss about supposed site rigging rather than spend that time usefully; improving his game?

Well, at least they're just slowing the law down rather than contravening it.

BTW, which law are they slowing?

Partypoker withdraw from the US because of UIGA and it has cost them a million dollar every day since. You really think Partypoker and all the other sites can not afford legal advice?
You think they would give up millions of revenue if they had any reasonable doubt?

No, you're wrong. I accept that statistics and probability is counter-intuitive.

One standard deviation after 1,000 samples is much larger than one standard deviation after 100 samples. That's a simple fact. There's nothing to debate here. You just need to look into this yourself, because I don't see any simpler way that I can explain this point.

The way that courts work in the Western world is that they do not give rulings before events. They rule on the facts, after an event. It is not possible to obtain a court ruling before the fact.

This is another pretty fundamental issue in discussing this issue. Your repeated failure to create fictitious explanations for relatively simple issues - when you are quite self-evidently and undeniably wrong - is really quite puzzling.
What law do they break?

Who has been prosecuted for offering online poker services?

Dude, please show what part of the UIGEA says that it is illegal for online poker sites to offer their services to US players.

The point you make has no factual basis and it is simply an opinion (an uninformed one at that).

EDIT: Check out this thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...pecial-587846/

take the time to look up the "unknown luckboxes", document their names, we'll look them up in whatever online databases are out there which track winnings to make sure they are in fact winning ridiculous amounts of money from the honest players, and we'll get to the bottom of this crap so we can shut those luckboxes down.

Oh wait, you can't? You're a moron? You're talking out of your rear end again?

Do you have a credible source for that figure?

Or are you propagating someone else's guess?

Or did you just make it up?

They probably decided that it was not worth the effort because of the hassle they would get moving money on and off the site.

THESE are gold IMO and I am a rigtard. nh

I don't see any simpler way that I can explain this point.


You can not explain it because it is nonsense in this context.

The way that courts work in the Western world is that they do not give rulings before events.

All the other sites did not need any court ruling they just stopped even though it cost them milions everyday. I repeat: They are betting millions everyday that Stars and FT are wrong.

Your repeated failure to create fictitious explanations for relatively simple issues - when you are quite self-evidently and undeniably wrong - is really quite puzzling.

Yeah right




I declare I am not paid directly or indirectly or have any economic interest in any sites apart from playing on them as a regular customer.

Yes. Honestly I laughed so hard when i found google results for: "lizard people"

I always value your thoughts and opinions, but I'm not sure of the details of this but I'll look it up in a bit, just woke up, no coffee yet. But I think it was with the bank siezures, they(Federal agents) were sationed all over the the court house, so when they showed up they were going to be immediatly arrested. Just throwing that in till I actually get facts...gimme a few...

Sure, go for it.

The goal here is to find one person prosecuted for playing online poker, or for operating an online poker site.

Well before I do, lol, nobody has been prosecuted for playing online poker or operating a poker site, correct?. Party Poker agreed to pay fines b/c they were deceptive on their charge statements.

No, it is not.

It's a pretty fundamental premise of statistics, and, indeed, standard deviation is proportional to sample size.

You really need to either take a high school statistics class, or type 'standard deviation' into Google or Wikipedia.

Here's the link to the Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation


Sure. They have a view. Other people have a different view.

The way Western legal systems operate is based on the concept that if someone (or the Government) accuses someone else of breaking the law, they (basically) start a court case alleging this. Yet, AFAIK, not one person has been prosecuted for playing online poker in the USA, and, AFAIK, not one person has been prosecuted for running an illegal online poker site in the USA.

How can you claim that it is illegal, a flagrant breach of the laws, but are unable to point to a single single court case that has prosecuted this activity? This is yet another irrational accusation without evidence in a thread full of irrational accusations without evidence.

If we want to talk about stuff that is 'rigged' and 'biased', how about we talk about the obvious rig and bias in this thread by people who make accusations of online poker being unfair, but having no evidence to support their claims. There's obviously not a random correlation between believing online poker is rigged and having no evidence to support the claim. It's as if there's a conspiracy of people who randomly make stuff up to throw mud at others, without having the integrity or decency to provide evidence to support their false and offensive accusations.

Yeah, I think so.
TBH, I'm not certain. Perhaps someone could look into this case and provide evidence to prove me wrong.

I'm certainly not foolproof, and I certainly make mistakes. This could be it.

hello rigtards and antirigtards as i see you havnt moved much forward in 2 or 3 months i wasnt around . Gl for the both sides of debate