That is the standard response of someone who has a significant suspicion that the deal is rigged.

Imagine you went into a restaurant and said: "I am not saying that the meat you serve here is dog , though I have an open mind and want to be convinced it isn't.

Imagine the reception you'd get.

I see your mind is closed to the possibility it could be rigged. Do you have enough HH data to confirm it isn't?

It is a bit like me going into a dog kennel, though with chicken grease spread all over me, to raise the possibility of a game being rigged in a forum full of people who's livelyhood depends on it not being rigged.

What?

Oh well.

A rigtard runs out of steam and reverts to type by indirectly accusing everyone who doesn't agree with him of being a shill.

If you can find a problem with the maths or logic, all well and good, but if you can't, making veiled accusations of shillary just makes you look stupid.

OK, then, if the odds are 1 in 19 and the odds for Pocket Pairs are 1 in 17(all odds approximated), then the odds are close enough to each other, then casual observance is impossible to make the statement that it might be rigged.

If the data were available to me and I had a way to crunch the numbers I could satsify myself even more that I am wrong to consider that it could be rigged. I don't have the data, and I have to believe that anyone who would have it, may have a valid reason not to look at it. /thread?

Seriously though, post your stats about how often you see mono flops in the hands you play. Then there will be something to discuss.

First I would have to find my HH on my computer, then I would need time to manually go through it.

This thread will be long forgotten before I could get around to it. I am hoping someone who has their data and one of the software analysis programs that can look at it can see if it tracks the probable odds(of shown flops)

If it were that easy to do I would have long before my OP.

You really are one of the worst internet researchers ever.

This is the quote from spadebidder's site that I already posted in my reply to you

Now where do you think a good place to look for the answer would be?

One of the headings on every page of pokerftp.com is "FAQ" ... maybe a good place ????

First FAQ ...
And if you actually read spadebidders site, you will see that most of the datasets are identified as 'Site A" or "Site B", so if spadebidder is privy to which site is which, he's not telling either.

That sounds like standard rigtard paranoia.

In fact, people have taken vast amounts of data and analysed it.

See, for example, here.

Ok, got ya.

Do you seriously believe that with the hundreds of millions changing hands via on line poker that no one has ever though what you've thought?

Or that having thought that they have not analysed their hand histories?

Or that if anyone had found anything there would not have been an almighty ruckus that would have reverberated around these forums for ever?

I don't play nearly as much as most but here is what I have for this year:

Total hands played - 111,873
Total Flops seens - 16,696
Total Monotone Flops - 872

Monotone Flops : Total Flops - 1:19.147

Total Pocker Pairs Dealt - 6,489

Total Pocker Pairs : Total hands - 1:17.240

So even in a relatively small amount of hands, I think I came pretty close to the expected results.

this thread is almost as funny as the dealer last week at the borgata lecturing me on how dumb i am for playing online poker

Here. This is as good as it gets imho.

cruzin - You're right. Monotone flops on Stars actually happen 1 in every 80 times instead of 1 in every 19 times like they should. You happened to be the only one to catch this and you did it without looking at any HH's and simply figured it out by casual observation. It's truly amazing that nobody else has even noticed this.

Thanks for your contributions. Maybe we should notify Stars that they need to change their RNG to deal out more monotone flops. I'm sure it was just an unintentional oversight since everything else there is on the up-and-up. They just messed up on the monotone-flop % part of the RNG.

can I pay realdeal $50 to audit this thread?

The fact that there are actually people like the OP who truly think they are the only ones who have come up with the idea remains fascinating to me.

He truly think people have not tested this.

Monteroy
regardless how many bizzard theory rigged may have.
the trues will always stand up to all test.
saying it's impossible to prove and it's not fun, is not a best way to convince somebody that you are right and they are wrong.
if poker site is fair, then the large data analysis from spadit should be able to with stand anything that riggist can come out with their creative mind.
ie.
shortstack win too much
test: no
vpip 40 suckout more often
test: no
too many setup hand
test: no
.....etc you get what i mean.
this is how science work
got a theory-> test it-> confirmation.
monteroy, i take it you are not a science person but more of a regious person.
this is behavior analysis from all your post.
Monteroy think poker rng = GOD
and GOD cannot be questioned
so all science = riggies
and all test on any riggie theory vs god is not allow.

No. It cannot.

It can only show what it was designed to show.

Exactly, each of those is a specific test and has to be programmed differently. And rigtards can come up with the any number of the most incredibly fanciful scenarios.

That's nonsense. He's never said anything even remotely like that.

Quite the reverse.

Rigtards disallow any logical or maths based refutation of their pet theory and scream: 'shill'.

Not sure what you mean by that.

allyasia,

If you are going to take on the shills, you should work on your writing skills. All they are going to do is rip you apart starting with spelling and your language. It is obvious that your native language is not English, but I am sure that you can do a lot better than this...

Can you see a single comment about spelling, punctuation, or grammar in my response above?

Instead of mocking his communication skills Donko why don't you help him with his 40% VPIP theory that also seems to incorporate supreme beings (though sadly not enough Lizard People). Show the "shills" the proper way to handle a riggie like this if you are up for the challenge. That would also represent a fun change of pace on your approach to this thread.


Keep in mind this guy is dead serious about his beliefs. Also, he is from Toronto so English (even his variation) is probably his primary language.

Good luck on that adventure if you choose to partake.

You donko him allyasia


All the best.

The data Tyler provided shows that the recent results I have been seeing. Are probably just a short time anomoly then. Thanks Tyler. That's all I was looking for. No thanks to all the haters. It doesn't hurt to get confirmation from time to time.

Anyone who wonders why some of the shills have little time for the rigtards need only look at this miserable specimen for enlightenment.

He come here asking if his maths is faulty.

People take the trouble to politely point out where his maths is, indeed, wrong - or incorrectly applied. And the fundamental errors he's making in the logic of examining the deal.

And what thanks do we get?

We're referred to as haters.

Cruzincat, if you can't understand the difference between someone spending time trying to help you and someone hating you, there's little hope for you in life.