This thread is up there with the guy who wants his 20k back from absolute after blowing it all like a moron on blackjack.

Yes you are bound to lose.

Just like this thread is bound to be merged in just a few seconds, once I find the great rigging thread for you.

In after merge.

Actually, we still have a telepathic link, so he can communicate what happened. The next door neighbors dog bit him and as he was leaving his furry body he could see that this wasnt a dog after all, it was a lizardman disguised as a dog. We now have proof of lizardmen so that means that we now have proof that online poker is rigged.

On a more serious note, our little Nico was found dead of a dog bite in the back alley, I told the neighbor that I better not see her dog out running around loose in the neighborhood again or I am going to have animal control out to pick it up. This dog hurt another cat a few months ago, but the cats owner stopped it from killing her cat. I like to include our cat in on some jokes because it keeps things light. He was supercool, I will add his pic on my profile here when I get a chance. sigh...

Repeating it doesn't make it true.

It's this simple: The companies that pulled out are publicly traded. Those that stayed are privately owned.

Sounds about right. Which would mean that someone at your table should receive some kind of pocket pair about once every 2.7 hands or so. Don't trust your own eyes and brain to determine whether this is happening - trust your hand histories. And keep in mind you don't know what your opponents' hole cards are every time, and this will skew the types of hands you see from them. Check the data for your own hands; that would be reliable.

also, keep in mind that people are more apt to play and show down pocket pairs as opposed to random hands like 2-7 offsuit, so you may have a skewed view of how many times people really are dealt pocket pairs and the fact that it may be too often.

There was obviously a merge while I was away, but, Party Poker paid the DOJ in fines so they could avoid "Prosecution" I was reading on this before b/c I thought Party was basicly bending over and taking it b/c they wanted the USA to favor them when they reopen the Online Poker Market to US players. They claimed they did not knowingly break the law and when the DOJ told them it was against the law, they stopped accepting US wagers. From what I understood we were pissed off on the way they stated their charges on banking and credit card statements. Not sure but I guess I'll look it up again.

If you do perhaps you could find the proper place to post any information you find.

We get a lot of people posting rigged stuff in other threads but so far no one has been so animal stupid as to post legal stuff in the rigged thread.

Oh, wait ...

Like I said I appreciate Josems views and posts here, but I don't appreciate you referring to his question about online poker sites being prosecuted and legalities of poker as "animal stupid." Is he "animal stupid" for bringing that up? And that's exactly what your implying. I feel it's completely relevent and I'm pretty sure his point was based on if online poker sites were that crooked, then surely one of them would have faced some sort of legal action.

Spoken like a true champ Monteroy. You do a good job here. Effective and without being sensitive (or being a dick).

Look, compile your own simulation of something random, and graph it. Do this yourself so you can't accuse me or anyone else of running some conspiracy here. Do it using something from outside poker to prove this is a universal concept.

You will see that over time, your graph will look further away from the mean, just as the graph talked about at that other website.
No one is claiming online poker is 100% clean.

My view is that the random shuffle process at PokerStars is fair, random and unbiased. I have that view 'cause that's what I know best. I also happen to think that it's unlikely that any other major site has any problems with their shuffle.
Yes, exactly. So show some graph or hand history that shows something wrong.

If the shuffle of a site is rigged, it will change the outcome of hands. This will be reflected in hand histories.
This is just not true.

I work for an online poker site. If I was involved in rigging a deck or stealing equity from a player in some way, I would expect to go to jail for it.

The USA is not the only place in the world with courts and jails and a legal system. You folks didn't invent these things, and the rest of us largely obey our laws too.

I don't understand how they could not be using a RNG 24/7.

Do you mean that to allege, for example, the deck is rigged only between 1pm and 3pm? Or do you mean something else?

Like, the fact that decks are shuffled and dealt 24/7 is pretty strong evidence that the PokerStars server is shuffling and dealing 24/7. Given that their RNG is self-evidently a fundamental part of their shuffling and dealing process, I don't understand how you could imagine their RNG is only operating part-time.

You can use a piece of software like Hold'em Manager or Poker Tracker.

If you do not have access to either piece of software, you have two options

1) You can buy it

or

2) You can ask someone in this thread to review your hand histories and share the results.

If you want, I would be happy for you to send me your hand histories, and I will do this simple analysis for you. If you would prefer to have someone else do it, then I would not be offended

Spot on, I agree. Fortunately, this stuff can be easily verified yourself, and you've got a huge network of people here who can help you.

But the 'error' between the two lines, expressed as a percentage, should converge to zero. The distinction between absolute error and percentage error is what confuses so many poker players and leads to the gambler's fallacy that things will "even out" eventually.

I was confused by it as well. I kept seeing players talk about how variance would even out for you in the long run, and I kept thinking, "How does variance know what to do? How do the cards know that I'm supposed to get some extra aces to make up for the small amount I've gotten up to now?" On the one hand, it made sense to me that in the very, very long run there would be relatively little difference between my expected results and my actual results. On the other hand, it didn't make sense that the universe would somehow remember and let me hit a few extra straight draws somewhere down the road. I was sure something was decreasing (other than my bankroll), but I couldn't figure out what.

Basically, I couldn't sort it out by myself. But finally, some kind soul in the probability forum explained it for me. It might have been you, in fact. Whoever it was, mucho thanks. It cleared up a lot.

I think what he might be saying here is that the RNG could be running during the times when an inspector is coming by and another program could be running other times to manipulate the outcome. He wants proof that this isnt happening. I think that Pstars could take another strong step in gaining everyones confidence by putting a stronger effort into the independent supervision of their site and their games. This would be good for business in my opinion. I would suggest that they dont change what they have in place, they just fortify it using individuals, companies or agencies in other countries outside of the Isle of Man. Maybe Canada, USA, Russia? More oversite (hope I spelled that right), more un announced visits, more readily available data on these audits. If a site like Pstars is serious about it reputation, then something like this would be another star for them in their quest to provide customer service and game security that blows the entire industry completely out of the water. Your thoughts?

This last statement in my opinion is a cheap shot. English may not be this posters first language. I wish I could speak and write in a second language as good as he can. Unfortunalely, the Spanish side of my Spanish/Irish ancestory must be too lazy to do so...or is it the Irish side...hmmm...lol

His name is Eddie Mush. You obviously haven't see A Bronx Tale. If I had to guess I would say English is his first language.

Even if it is his second language, I was just taking a shot at his obvious lie that he is in an advanced statistics course and I don't mind if it was cheap because in my opinion you get what you pay for.

Then you should retract your rude and impetuous disagreement with Josem's statement of fact when he said, "Over time, there should be an increase in difference between expected and actual performance."

There is no "context" as you keep alluding to, that will ever make this a false statement. Don't even continue trying to argue this point, he used straightforward words that don't allow misunderstanding here. Either you made a mistake and then tried to dance around it, or you truly don't understand it. He was not referring to a ratio or proportion, he said "difference".

Want to see rigged? Just go watch ftp mtts deep. After doubling someone, that new shortstack will just get a big hand right after to double with...they will just keep doubling people in this way repeatedly, making effective stacks a ******edly small amt. Also, they will let a shorty suckout and double from an absurdly low amt, then get a big hand and get sucked out on. Works both ways repeatedly deep.

I love it! So your theory is FTP wants to keep players in tournaments longer? I'm not sure I've heard this angle before. Bef--could you please explain how this would help the site and why they would do it? Also, your evidence is the fact that your mind sees the patterns right?

Beautiful. Rigging that costs the site money. Excellent post. Well played sir.

LOL! You do have a good point. Some of you guys must be so sick of seeing the same stuff over and over again. I guess I cant blame you for lashing out...

Doesnt sound like a rig, it sounds like a malfunction...lol

brain malfunction imo

Think of it this way (and yes this is an attempt at a serious response). What limits do you place on making everyone happy?

You have read this thread, seen all the creative theories. Now a guy is saying small stacks win too much in tourneys. Others say big stacks win too much. How exactly are you going to make both of them happy?

Eventually it comes down to providing reasonable security and also applying a reasonable amount of common sense. There is no way to make any extreme belief happy, because they will always find a new way to be unhappy.

Ok, the RnG is good, but what if it only runs some of the time? What if it only runs when inspectors are there? Now we have extra people who flip the on and off switch who also never reveal the secret (they must be very well paid button pushers). Where does this end?

The reality of the actual customer base is that the vast majority are either satisfied with the security or generally do not care because they are playing for fun. This thread brings out the extreme paranoid people so like selective memory at the tables it feels like more people have these beliefs.

Most do not. Most are quite happy or do not care. Most that are unhappy can never be made to be happy because they will always have another what if.

This thread alone is thousands of posts long of so many what ifs from the semi interesting to the outright insane, tell me Donko in all seriousness - how will you actually make them all happy?

I hear realdealpoker is getting close now. Their stated target market is the rigtards of the world. They deal real cards on webcam. Enjoy the movie.