Bout time...

Hey TwoMoos! What do you think of spadebidder's results so far? www.spadebidder.com



p.s: While TK can be infuriating at times, he can also be funny. The crying wrestling fan gave me a chuckle, and he has the occasional good one liner.

Wouldn't it only make sense then, using your logic, that B&M casinos rig their poker games to feed the rake and keep the fish in action? If online sites would rig it despite making them millions of dollars a day in rake, surely live rooms that are losing money all the time would be willing to put some action flops out.

When was the last time your local Shuffle Master was audited?

For the most part, B&M's do not profit much on poker games. If they charge session, that's different.

Online sites:
-Operate out of unregulated offshore jurisdictions - check
-Employing a rng dealing program without inspection - check
-Freedom to do whatever you want - CHECK < -- that's a good one
-An increasing number of ppl becoming aware of the abnormalities and shady foundations of these sites - check .

If anyone can form a cogent argument fas to why a party/parties would not "rig" a site for more profit, please post it. I am simply curious as to why they inspire so much confidence among online players.

Did you read ANY part of this thread before making this post?

825 pages. So, not more than a couple back.

Not true of all sites (both the unregulated and "offshore" bits.) Again, not true of all sites. That's strike 3. Abnormalities and shady foundations such as? You do realize that just making a statement doesn't make what you say true, right? You're the one who just said people are becoming aware of abnormalities, go ahead and point some out. Hell, point one out with any kind of proof beyond a single hand history or faulty memory. For some reason, when no evidence has been presented that something is crooked, and lots of evidence has been presented that something is fair, I tend to believe it to be fair.

Pretty stupid of me, I know, but you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

You don't have to go back too far, there are lots of explanations. You might want to check our Spadebidder's website: www.spadebidder.com as well.

The short answer is: whether or not someone would want to rig the deck, it is very difficult to do without getting caught. Spadebidder's massive study shows why. Any rigging that is done to an extent that would affect profits would show up in the stats.

Do yourself a favour, read a substantial portion of this thread, just skim over the multitude of insults and focus on the substantive parts. There is lots of good stuff in here. It's just a bit burried.

Also: set your posts per page to 100.

No, they do not.
No, they do not.
No, they do not.
No, there are not. The deals are legit, and you just seem to be a lying liar that lies.
The fact that you believe people would steal if they could is a reflection on your own lack of integrity, not a reflection on online poker.

Sorry, tk1133.

You make so many outlandish statements that I didn't take you seriously.

That was inexcusable on my part so my sincere apologies for a crass and insensitive post.

So many of the riggies here need to read this article: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...nl_6004.4.2.11

Go down to where the author talks about Seeing patterns and Holding on to losers

I did and when I saw that

[ Pair & 3+gap rainbow] 4.561% 4.574% 13

was the biggest off expected it made me wonder why so many riggedologists (or riggies - have to admit that is annoyingly cute) have not been up in arms about the clear patterns that exist on flops that

have a pair and 3+gap and are rainbow


I mean come on, anyone could notice that even though ironically this would be one of the least "action" flops possible.

Hmm, it must be that they intentionally add some of these to hide for the fact how they rig other ways. Yeah, that explains it, I knew the rainbow flops with a pair and a 3+ gap were involved somehow...

By the way, the detail of his site does give some jarring perspective and depth compared with the relatively tiny areas that genuine riggedologists/riggies seem fixated by.

want to make a bet.

I say the 1058 people that voted no so far are signicantly better in poker than the 633 people that voted yes. Anybody out of these 633 interested?

Funny how not one riggedologist has commented on the actual results.

Nah, not funny really. And kind of expected.

From the word go it was pretty obvious that the results were going to be -EV for the 'tards.

All good QPW, no hard feelings...

And we as Rigtards, don't understand what EV means, we're losing players, it doesn't matter what it means. It would be like asking a man with no arms how fast he can throw a baseball.

We only look at things like 1, 2 and 3 outters. Which has evolved our play. Now, I only play big pots when I'm a huge underdog. I haven't mastered the art of "donkinism" but am striving to inflect as many bad beats and suck outs as possible. That's how our play has evolved....

I get horrible migranes trying to understand Spade's results, the first time I read it I had to lay down for an hour...
Seriously tho,

After the headache wore off I found that his research shows evidence of a NON-RIGGED RNG.

I feel like I have a peashooter and he has nuclear smart bombs.

Fair enough, its not the easiest material. So let's just accept that you and I are not qualified to understand a lot of it. It may even be completely wrong for all I know. But what do we have? We have a lot of data that's been analysed by an expert who has concluded the deal is fair.

Should we accept that conclusion without question? Of course not. However, I would think that at a minimum it should provide some comfort. Now if someone looks at that stuf and shows that the methodology is all wrong, etc etc then maybe we should back off from that comfort. But absent that this is pretty good evidence that the deal is fair for the sites studied.

I said I wouldn't check this thread for a while but I'm weak.

To be clear, the data published so far is strong evidence that the deal up through the the FLOP is random, and it also pretty much proves that flops have some predictable but small biases caused by player behavior preflop (since we don't deal all flops). I'm still working on turns and rivers, to see if suckouts happen at the expected rates or not, and if not then I'll try to determine why. Some of the rigged theories only involve suckouts on late streets. So we can't let those arguments die just yet. Riggies don't lose the faith!

I usually add the caveat "results so far". Forgot in that post.

Great work spadebidder,

Yeah, this. Seeing other people hole cards is illegal. I don't do illegal things, neither support anyone doing such.

Come on...keep it real V8...Where did I come up w/ "snooping" then? Why after I blasted your website did most of "this kind of stuff" get removed from your site?

I am not attacking you for what you've done and I've heard many good things about you since.

Prove them right....

This is nonsense. Illegal content like hacking hole cards has never "lived" for more than an hour anywhere I'm in charge. I'm not interested to engage with you in debates, therefore I wouldn't discuss this further.

As a side note, I can actually tell you how I personally treat the most annoying rigtards. There was one especially dumb, which after some investigation also happened to be involved in illegal activities elsewhere in the net. I not only banned him, I furthermore recovered his complete name and address and reported him to his ISP, and to the UK police computer crime investigation and forensics litigation support department.

It's like some kind of weird drug, right? I love this thread. Keep up the good work, btw.