For the ten thousandth time, because there's absolutely zero evidence that there is. I don't know what you're looking at that has you so convinced there's a problem, but I've played about a million hands without seeing what you're seeing. When you make a claim that when you're all in with the best hand you lose most of the time... I'm sorry but that's easily supportable with evidence. It's actually pretty easy to do. That doesn't mean you don't run badly at times. We all do. But when you throw out a blanket statement like that which is based on selective memory at best, it just has no credibility.

Surely you can see why it's annoying as hell when people make claims that something is wrong and then continually have nothing to back it up? Those of us who do grind at the tables for hours at a time and don't cry about every bad day get sick of other people running through the same stuff we do and making excuses for it.

To Monteroy. Also, since I am bad at online poker, I suggest that you take advantage of this fact and set up a private tournament on stars that posters in this thread could play in so that you can win money from the bad players. I would be happy to jump into one of these tournaments with you and even make it a regular thing monthly. Think of the extra money you could make off of bad players like me adding just one more extra table to your online quiver. What do you think?

I am working on the stats, since PT isnt working on my computer, I having to collect this stuff up by hand. I will post my info though, as soon as I have completed it.

Can you post your results for the math nits to examine?

Heh, adjusted to the rig. Search me when I play when Stars is actually running and you will see I am on 12-16 tables of NL, Omaha, MTTs and cash games as well as a handful of ipoker tables (hate that software so usually 4-5 is most I can add).

Tell me, how does one "work around the rig" when doing that exactly?

Dude, seriously, it's all about playing +EV games and understanding the games (and I am hardly suggesting I am the best in the world at any of this). A couple of years ago my MTT results (lower volume of play) were ok, but it was a ton of min cashes until I adjusted how I play in various situations vs various types of opponents. Playing "around the rig" had nothing to do with it.

If I found a way to "play around the rig" then I would be one of the biggest riggedologists you ever saw in an effort to discourage others from doing what I was doing. I pretended to be a "all casinos are rigged" guy for just that reason, even posting that while I was clearing massively +EV bonuses just to discourage others. Then the entire country of Denmark invaded online casinos...


No offense, but why would I trade one of my 15ish tables for something like that, even if it was a bit more EV. If I want to do "fun" tournaments I'll do some of the Canada promo ones, twoplustwo forum ones etc. Why would I do one with people I have no real interest to interact with at the tables?

You can search me and join the SnGs I am entering or the cash tables I am on if you want.

True, if it turned out that I was good enough to make you look bad, then you would be so embarrassed about losing to a rigtard. LOL! just kidding. I see your logic. I'll just find you sometime on Stars or in the 2+2 tournaments. Not to badger you, just to say hello. I am not a jerk, I just have differing opinions on this subject. I might even learn a thing or two playing on one of your tables.

Take care and happy holidays.

Joe

What is changes is that "show the inspectors one thing and run something else on the servers" riggedness is not possible.


I have no idea what the sites are doing, and it may be that they already have systems and procedures in place that make such swapping verifyably not possible. I hope they do.

Well for starters, you have the inspectors rebuild the programs from the source code they are shown and check to see if the resulting executable is identical to whats running on the server.

But most importantly you (the inspector) ask to see the secured logs and if there is anything wrong with them you cry foul.

And you know they haven't been tampered with because of this ....

http://www.schneier.com/paper-secure-logs.pdf

Abstract
In many real-world applications, sensitive information
must be kept in log files on an untrusted machine.
In the event that an attacker captures this
machine, we would like to guarantee that he will
gain little or no information from the log files and to
limit his ability to corrupt the log files. We describe
a computationally cheap method for making all log
entries generated prior to the logging machine's compromise
impossible for the attacker to read, and also
impossible to undetectably modify or destroy.

(I don't understand 90% of that paper, but anything with Bruce Schneier's name on can be taken to the bank)

I don't think it would be all that expensive, but we can agree to disagree ...

... I was mostly pissed off that you (qpw and Monteroy) called me a rigtard/riggedologist

Indeed.

I'll just point out that many organisations do spend vast sums of money to attempt to verify software and it still has many bugs in it.

If people can't find things in software that were not even hidden what chance do they have if someone's out to fool them?

Carelessness on my part, I'm afraid. When I wrote that I thought something was not quite right and I should have checked more thoroughly. I waas wrong.

My apologies and I withdraw the accusation.

I call that bluff. I don't believe Mont. for one second. What could you possibly learn from him?

Any interest in heads up Mont? Same goes for you QPW...

I've lost about 90 percent of my coinflips the past few weeks, so it must be rigged.

Shrug, sure. Find me and we can sit at a HU $100 PL Omaha buy in table for a while and see how things go. We can pick a time and everyone can watch, it will be like the Isuldur matches only with fewer commas and less zeros in the pots. The rake paid will be about the same at least!

You can even make fun of Canada as well and I will leave it to you to guess what the third part of the most cliched online poker trash talk routines are (after the HU challenge and stereotyping which are generally 1st and 2nd among "special" people). Odds are you will just do it naturally anyway, but may be fun for you to guess.

Let me know.

I would never make fun of Canada...My ancestors founded Quebec...Louis Hubert, to be honest I knew the name as Hebert, but ancestry.com has it as "Hubert."

Do you play on FTP sir?

Nope. Creating an account to observe and never deposit into (still never have) 5 years ago meant zero rakeback today, so safe to say nobody will ever accuse me of being a Full Tilt shill.

I'm easy to find on Stars though often I have chat off (depending on number of tables). Toward the end of a day when I just have the leftover MTTs going is a good time if you go that route as I have chat on then.

What are your screen names by the way?

This is so true. You'd think that at least a few rigged believers would take note of this. Hopefully there are people out there who are on the edge that notice it.

Hundreds of people come through this thread throwing out all sorts of random anecdotal observations and conjecture. And how many provide any solid evidence? None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Doesn't that make some of you wonder? I know that lots of people don't use tracking software, or can't be bothered/don't know how to post any evidence, but surely there would be a few people that would've posted something by now.

WHY are you guys so annoyed? Do you work for one of the poker sites? Are you guys damage control in the threads? If I owned a site, I would hire guys like you to browse the threads because rigged or not, talk in threads like these would not be good for business. I could understand and respect if that is your job. What I dont understand is why you would be so irritated if you were just a normal person reading through the "Poker is Rigged Debate thread".

It's not like I'm at my computer seething with rage or it's keeping me up at night. But as a regular reader of this forum, it's annoying seeing all the threads (which is why we started merging them into this one), and it's not good for the game for people to think they're being cheated if they're not.

The most annoying thing of all is trying to reason with some of the rigtards, which is why I don't post ITT very much anymore.

You are not showing up when I search on Stars. Do you have your "Hide from the search" on?

Wow this really is a religious debate now. I'm gonna make like tree and GTFO

Maybe I have something, but I don't know wether it is enough data already to call it rigged.

I got 31.597 hands of MTTs all played at the same site tracked with PT3. I mostly played in the same type of tournaments (satellite 1$ and 2$ rebuys and a few 1$ and 2$ without rebuy). It is 604 tournaments played.

I don't wanna complain coz I am winning actually (am ~1k up).

Now the strange thing that I see if I sort my starting hands by no. of times i held them i see the following cards (only off-suite ones):
52o 327 times
JTo 325 times
T5o 313 times
K2o 310 times
Q4o 308 times
A5o 307 times
96o 305 times
T8o 304 times
...
AKo 264 times
84o 261 times
AQo 261 times
J7o 260 times
K8o 260 times
85o 256 times
Q7o 247 times
73o 246 times

What I don't like is that i get 52o a lot more than let's say AKo or AQo.

It could be that my sample size is just to small. Maybe someone can calculate how big the derivation could/should be with this specific amount of data.

Cheers / Andy

PS: And just to warn you......I AM RIGGED not the site

Ok, that makes sense. You are right, less people will deposit and play if they see this kind of stuff. If something is up with the programming on the sites, I should stop playing and I want to let my friends know so they dont get ripped off. I dont like getting ripped off. If it is happening, I want revenge. That is just me.

I am going through my hand histories by hand looking at draws and all in beats because PT wont work on my computer. I will post the results here. If I am wrong, I am wrong. Right now, I have no proof outside of my own flawed memory. I understand the arguments.

I will if someone else who plays on there thinks the same as me. But if I just post 20-30 7-10/1 shots people will just say sample size.

no, they will say cherrypicked

No matter what you think there will always be people out there who will agree, and some will think things that will make even you laugh. Read over this thread you will find all sorts of gems like the guy who thought they rigged it against laptops because the sites know people play more at their home computer. You agree with that? You think that's nuts? I'm sure he could post all sorts of bad beat hands he had on his laptop if that helped.

Anyone who plays a lot can post dozens of bad beats per week, they should happen with enough volume. Want me to post all my 19-1 or worse post flop beats in a week? Even had a 989-1 the other week and 3 AK losing to AK in the same day (can't even remember the last loss before then like that) Will that prove something to you? If they do then tell me what threshold you need to see and I will cherry pick my hands to meet that as well.

Thanks, I am in the 40k. See you at the final table...lol

Is this in one day?