I believe, if I were writing such code (I'm also a programmer), I might try something like this for a cash game:

- Deal hole cards randomly
- Analyze preflop betting activity and whether or not a lower stack is in danger of being eliminated
--------------------
- If lower stack is in danger of losing all chips, 50% of the time go random, other 50%: pick 5 random cards and analyze hand strengths, if lower stack not stronger, repeat
------------------------
- If lower stack not in danger, go forward with normal strategy
- 75% of the time deal cards randomly
------------------------
- 25% of the time analyze hands that will see the flop
- Pick 3 random cards and analyze remaining hands' strengths (against random hands, not each other), if two hands or more are very strong, proceed with that flop, otherwise repeat
- Once flop has occurred and betting has completed, analyze rake
- If rake has reached maximum, deal remaining cards at random
------------------------
- If rake maximum not reached, pick a random card and analyze remaining hands' strengths again, if strengths improved, use card, otherwise repeat
- Once turn has occurred and betting has completed, analyze rake
- If rake has reached maximum, deal river at random
------------------------
- If rake maximum not reached, pick a random card and analyze remaining hands' strengths again, if strengths improved, use card, otherwise repeat

I would look for 2 concepts to keep play going and rake high.

1) Reasonably try to keep people from busting out to keep game going
2) Occasionally make sure rake maximum is being reached

This should be fairly hard to discover due to doing it at random times. The idea is to keep a pseudo random behavior in the deal so that no patterns are blatant.

This occurs in slot machines as well. Each machine is random, sort of. It keeps a tally on how much it is "up" or "down" and will modify future payouts to try and come back to it's normal payout. But the manner in which it does it is random.

This is just a rough draft from someone who has never tried doing it before. I'm sure someone with years of coding experience and customer feedback would find ways to be much more clever.

While I find the topic of programmers actually discussing how to rig somewhat interesting, I'm not sure how it helps in this discussion. Random or not, if its doing it on a regular basis it will be detectable in the HHs.

The issue is not whether it is possible for the programmer to rig: the issue is can they do it in a manner that would be statistically undetectable AND still not show up in the HHs over a sufficient sample.

That's the million dollar question. Greater minds than mine are needed to answer it.

Wait, what? Link to proof of this, please.

Privileged information not available on any website. I formally retract the comment.

LOL, OK whatever you say.

Pretty sure he is 100% wrong. They use an RNG and the payouts are controlled by the expected long term frequencies of the winning combinations. In a mechanical machine this would be completely determined by the combinations printed on the three reels, with the pictures on them in the desired ratios. In an electronic machine this is still true but virtual. For example, if a slot dealt two cards from a standard deck and wanted to pay out at a rate of 5.9%, it would just pay on every pair. The payouts follow the expected "deals", not the other way around. Random deals, and payouts designed around the expected frequencies of specific combinations.

Using his theory, just watching for the machine that has gone the longest without paying would be a profitable strategy. It isn't, because they are random and have no memory whatsoever as far as it affecting future spins.

Like I said, I retract the comment.

Yes, I know, but since he retracted I was letting it go.

I am obviously not a math guy, but that shouldnt stop me from being able to see that if some adjustments were made from a lot of different angles in small amounts, and in a very random fashion, you are not going to see much difference in the numbers. A river beat here, a couple of missed draws there, AA vs KK here, AA cracked a few times more often there, a run of crap cards for a stretch artificially simulating card dead there, on and on. I am just saying that these could be randomized so that testing to look for abnormalities and anomalies are much more difficult.

It has been stated in this thread that this kind of rigging would show up in the hand histories. This very well may be true if you can get your hands on a big enough sample. Lets just hope you are getting a big enough slice to see what you need to see conclusively though.

Until someone does a comprehensive study on tournaments with a big enough sample, there is always going to be a small amount of doubt in my mind about the programming. I would like to see the regulatory groups get much more comprehensive with their audits. That is just me. I do have a tendancy to believe that the big sites are legit, but I would be much more willing to deposit larger amount online if regulation was approached with a bit more scrutiny.

Lol, fukc. Rigtards now have an own forum ...?

Please regroup your folks, build some actual arguments, and then come back.

So far so good, if you said you played one on TV that would be kind of funny.

Actual math guys say this cannot happen.

You are not a math guy and say it can happen.

Do the math.

Lol.

I'll extend my subsription for this thread for another month.

What about this Bob Smith confession;

on December 29, 2008 at 5:31 pm Bob Smith

Their are many folk out there arguing about if online poker is rigged or not…I wold like to help put this to rest by stating that it is rigged in many different ways. i helped write some of the software for tiltware LLC…while working on the fulltilt site some of the other programmers and i were asked to install programming into the software that would recognize certain players and provide them with unbeatable hands. we were also asked to develope software that would provide what they called the”maximum oppurtunity to bet” which meant that the deals are rigged to deal out alot of good starting hands to alot of players so that the most betting possible would take place on every deal. The deal would then provide a monster flop in which atleast two players would be all in before the river.(ever wonder why nobody ever misses the flop online…because then no one would bet and that is not what fulltilt wants) This keeps the tourneys fast paced and exciting which players love. Fulltilt loves this too, the faster you lose the faster they can make more money off you by having enter another tourney.
There is also another way fulltilt cheats you out of cash with their own personal players. These players are called house players and are fulltime employees of the Fulltilt compnay. If you check some names and their online wins vs. loss records you will often find them with records that are simply unreal. I have seen some of these folks who win over 50 straight sessions without a loss…how can this be possible unless they are working on the inside. They come and go and change their names often but they play in the site with the full adavantage of being able to see all the cards in play and in the deck.
Another programming trick we wrote into the software at fulltilt is the levels trick…this trick takes place when a tournament has been running after the first break. The computer recognizes the different size of each players chip stack and begins to deal out hands in which a small stack will shove all in and a large stack will have a better hand to call with. Have you ever wondered why you get pocekt QQs with 1500 chips and the guy next to you gets pockets KKs and he has 10,000 chips? The answer is simple the site is programmed to get you to play as much as possible. So we programmed the site to eliminate the small stack as quickly as possible so that they can go enter another tourney asap. The site is even prgrammed to adjust the flop for big stacks so that even if the big stack calls your hand with nothing he will end up beating your good made hand by the river. Often times the site will deal you back to back hands with the same cards but maybe different colors or suits..this “glitch” is a sign that the computer is adjusting the shuffle to start elimnting small stacks and allow the tourney to finish quicker.
The sooner a tournament is done the faster fulltilt can have you back at another table spending more money…it is to this sites best interested to eliminate you from tables as fast as possbile. There is no one to regulate how the company manipulates the software to thier own advantage. There is no one to monitor how the company pays out its players and employees. Simply put, giving some offshore account your hard earned cash is simply insane. Thinking that these people arent cheating you out of your money is crazy, the site has many layers of hidden programming all set up to take full adavantage of all types of players from novice to expert.
the main reason i wrote this blog is to expose the fraud that takes place at online gaming site known as Fulltilt poker i was fired three months ago from the company that helped write the software..yes i am bitter and mad but i do fell everyone so know how bad fulltilt is and that is a site built by THIEVES!!

Isn't it interesting that there doesn't seem to be a single rigtard with a stats background?

If all these little adjustments even out so that the numbers don't change, then by definition we are back to a fair deal with no effect at all. You may want to research the "equity-shifting" theories.

Wildly off-topic, but this isn't true in the UK. Each play on a UK 'fruit machine' is not independent, and you can sometimes be in a position where you are guaranteed to lose if you spin again.

Watching the machine that has gone the longest without paying is a 'less bad' strategy in the UK (may even be profitable in extreme cases) because their minimum average payout is determined over 10,000 games, not on a 'per game' basis.

What about it?

Specifically, how does it differ from you posting it directly without quoting someone else, and you claiming to have helped write the software for Full Tilt? It is just a bald assertion with nothing to back it up, no evidence that 'Bob Smith' worked for FTP, no evidence that the guy who wrote this *is* that 'Bob Smith' even if there was one who worked for FTP.

Anyone can make up a long rant about some complete nonsense then add 'oh btw i work for the us government / cia / lizardpeople' but without some EVIDENCE it is meaningless.

They have several. The stereotypical "insider" story above is from
http://www.fraudpoker.com
( I seached for where the Bob Smith story above was posted)

The one the other guy says he mods is
http://www.pokerisrigged.com/

They are funny for a few minutes of browsing.

Sigh.

LOL, funny how that works.

Haha I like the disclaimer on the front page on the off chance some poker site could actually be bothered to sue them for slander

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, this is just too funny. How many pots did you win before you got sucked out? If you stayed alive for several hours I figure you played at least 10 hands.

The chances that you get sucked out 1 or several times during a MTT is probably greater than you winning every single pot where you are an great or slightly overdog.....

It sounds like you are describing a "Class II" slot machine, which I think in the U.S. is called a video lottery terminal. It pays like a lottery rather than every play being independent. Vegas-style slots (used in all U.S. casinos) are the Class III type where every spin/play is independent. Two different games.

Edit: found this about UK "fruit machines" on Wiki:

A) I don't think it's rigged

In simple terms, are you saying that for the unlikely 20 times in a row a players big pocket pair get cracked heads up (just as a for instance) there needs to be a counterbalance in the numbers to resolve to even?

Also, if equity is being rigged off of players and dumped off to programmed players in these tournaments then we wont see a discrepancy, right? Because someone or something will be showing the extra equity in their or it's numbers. Correct? And yes, I am talking about bots or programmed players for the site, friends of the site employees, shills, the owners cat, his wife, etc...

I am not saying that this is going on, but if some of you guys are going to test theories and look at the numbers, you might need to consider the range of possibilities right?