TPTK27, you should know by now your arguments are not even taken with a grain of salt when dealing with the "shill" brigade. Plus, artyshills might have actually left this thread. As with sleeping babies, DONT MAKE ANY NOISE! Let him sleep.

That's why I've given a situation to look at in HEM, and YOU look for yourself.

But, you never played FTP so were lucky in that respect

I'm sure other posters in this thread did play FTP however and could post some HH's to prove me wrong, but they won't because the situation I describe almost never happened at FTP. Which is about as much proof of the RNG being rigged as you could ask for.

To your first point, I still won money outright on my play at sites I believe to be rigging their deal, namely Cake, Ongame and MG.

I'm man enough to blame myself if I lose (I used to be a bad tilter and worked hard to stop that), and i'll give a site a chance, but common sense tells you when there is manipulation going on and you move sites. Just because you distrust a deal doesn't mean you can't adjust and avoid some of the rigs or that you can't play poker!!

I like to drop in every now and then, just waiting for SCS to drop by with the "player's don't call to showdown weak, hence you don't see weak hands at showdown argument."

Quite the shock!
How could have FTP ever been rigged! Given their flawless reputation, and never hearing anybody complain that the deal was manipulated, how could it have been?

Come on affiliate, whatever you are, wake the **** up, stop the annoying B.S. or GTFO!

Take your own advice first.

IN BOLD, +10000000
Also, you can avoid the rig for so long. After a while playing those rigged sites is futile.I know exactly what you are talking about.

Why don't you post your little theory in the Holdem Manager forums or the appropriate strategy forum (for your stakes) here and see what people say.

This thread has very few grinders in it (you are not a grinder, I was one but I am now only a 75-150 games a week player due to my schedule), so you seem to be avoiding the players who could show you everything you want by staying here with your requests.

Almost as if you do not want your questions answered.


Every day I play I see and hear guys just like you at the tables (nearly always the smaller buy ins though there was some riggie whining in a $109 the other day on Stars I can post if people are interested). What I pretty much always see with guys like you is that you play hard and play a thinking game to the best of your ability, but your game completely lacks depth. You simply do not have what it takes, and your results will always be below what you think they should be.

That's when guys like you start looking for reasons why your results are marginal. You may have made a few bucks now and then but you believe you should have made more. That's the foundation of your beliefs.

Also, as much as you say you take responsibility for your play and actions, the fact remains you do not. You have fabricated hands here and you keep pretending that never happened as if it will magically go away. If you were "man enough" as you say then you would at least on that area admit you did it and take responsibility for your behavior. To date you have yet to do this, and nobody expects that to change.

The online poker world is filled with guys like you. My nickname for them is "sub-regs." You fill chairs, you don't take too much out of the poker economy and you help games run by being there. Basically you are the inert matter that fills the seats to better allow the hunters to feed off the prey (the donks/casual players)

All the best.

LOL

Oh boy, you sure got me. I guess it's lucky for me that unlike the rigtards who see "obvious" evidence all around them, I repeatedly said my numbers might be off.

I sure am embarrassed though.

Hard to believe I was actually wrong on the Internet.

Agreed, complete tosser isn't he!

BR: TPTK is one of the only people in this thread actually caught in a lie - he apparently manufactured a handhistory to try and prove his point. He has provided no explanation for that.

Yet you are in bed with him. Why is that? Are you only critical of lying on the other side - if people who you agree with lie, then that's ok?

I did get you, and deservedly so.

You should be embarrassed.

When you employ figures and statistics to argue your point and one of the 'facts' you present is inaccurate to the tune of roughly 55 factors of ten, it suggests you either don't know what you are talking about or you don't believe in what you are saying.

With this rather naive slip of yours, be prepared not to be taken seriously.

Since you will never have the courage to be responsible for your actions or take your concerns to the forums where they can provide you with more data than you can imagine, I guess your best choice in between breaking even in the 10 NL world is posting here to receive unconditional love from that blatantdude, which he will provide anyone who posts anything with the word rigged in it. Be sure you do not tell him that you actually think some of the rooms are not rigged. Do you think Party Poker is rigged - yes or no?

Know what is fun with debating guys like you, watching how many times you will avoid direct questions before you break, kind of like how it took a whole to get you to verbally explode about 9/11 earlier in this thread (which then led to your manifestos about the depression, moon landings, Iraq etc).

As I said before, you are essentially inert matter. Congratulations on that.


Interesting new routine, now you are pretending to be a stats guy of some sort and lecturing others, similar to when you were a big shooter making fun of the stakes others played in between your $1 rebuy tournaments.

One of your many statements about statistics before this twist in your posting style. I suspect few people will worry too much about whether you take them seriously when it comes to math, since you have stated before that statistics frighten you and are meaningless.

To your credit, you do mix it up a bit, which is something you should teach to your two sidekicks.


All the best.

Oh, hi!

For those of you who missed it, here it is again:

Coming from a guy who uses his 'knowledge' to refute the arguments of posters on the subject of large numbers.

Which would be a great point, except I was only using the number as an idea of why hand history samples to detect rigging need to be 1,000,000+ hands instead of a smaller number like 25,000.

If anything my being wrong helped the point I was making.

Howdy. If you want to try to break your losing streak in debates with me today let me know, and I will even toss in a comment or two to get Wiki and blatantdude rushing by your side to provide you with moral support you like. You really should acknowledge them eventually for the help they give you, as they do mean well.

If you prefer to pass I completely understand (probably the correct choice by you), and you can move onto other targets (where you have a better track record), and I will leave you alone.

All the best.

I'm glad you are well.

Indeed. We had another solid week.

Your repeated avoidance indicates you are going to pass on the debate offer, and I understand that choice from your perspective. Have fun with the other guys today with your new stats guy routine, and when you feel ready at some point in the future to shot take again just let me know.

Good luck if you play a few of your favorite micro tournaments today as well.

All the best.

Ok. Sure thing.

It must be tough to live in Blatantly******ed’s imaginary world. He has created an existence in which his enemies are all employed by the same corporate entity and are so organized to combat his educating the masses about the rigged nature of online poker that they have a manual on how to respond to him. He has completed such in depth analysis of their corporate responses that he has the ability to narrow certain responses to page numbers in the shill manual. His understanding of his imaginary world is so completely thought out that he is able to detect through writing style that the 20 – 30 people that call him an idiot are actually only 2-3 people given the job of burying his message into a pile of rubble in an internet forum thread.

Trying to reason with a person like this is a complete waste of time; trying to have a rational discussion is idiotic. Asking him over and over for evidence or analysis when you know he 1) doesn’t have any; 2) is incapable of doing any, and; 3) won’t let facts or evidence deter him from spreading his message is a waste of effort. Flooding the thread with these requests with the smug sense of superiority when you don’t get any material response is almost as annoying as BR’s spam opinion postings.

BR and Jello believe online poker is rigged from their experience with it. They have no research and no evidence. The smug atheist converters have no ability to change these beliefs but try to look real cool and smart when they “beat” these guys in the thread.

Measured up against Spadebidder’s published study, I don’t know why the shills even waste time responding to these guys. (Of course, Spadebidder’s data was flawed, he is a pawn for the corporate poker sites, and the data was “fixed before it was given to him….yadda, yadda, yadda….) Spade and LA’s HH studies are great to debunk the best riggie theory out there: that there are too many action hands on line. They test it, show their work and the analysis leads one to the conclusion that this theory is not true. But Spade (more so than LA) admits to the limitations of their studies - they do not prove that online poker is not rigged. However to discount the enormity of the study and its finding is also a mistake of the riggies, especially when providing no such studies of their own (except for that one university study or TPTK’s falsified data – brilliant tactical moves by the riggies to win the argument…..just for a day).

In the context of only empirical data, these studies may carry the day and win the argument for the shills but these guys are not good corporate citizens with unquestionable ethics and reputations. Why and how the shills ignore these facts in their “analysis” is beyond me. The people run the corporation, not the computers. These sites were started and run by former pornographers and convicted felons (and soon to be convicted). They mostly serviced the U.S and Europe but are run from island countries outside the laws of their customer base. Either the Fulltilt regulators were incompetent or bought off or Fulltilt was run by geniuses that beat the regulators for 3 years with cooked books – take your pick. But it’s not a situation where the government oversight was adequate to protect the interest of the players and FT was run by a bunch of idiots that made “bad business decisions” as the shills claim.

These a-holes stole $400+ millions over three years. These are not the guys that I trust to operate the game fairly….these are the types of guys that cheat even when they don’t have to. You guys can wait for the empirical data to prove the RNG was rigged, I would rather stop playing online and play “live” where I trust the integrity of the game with the safeguards in place to stopped cheating by the house or the players. I do miss multi-tabling and playing at home until I can’t stay awake but until I am convinced that the games are not rigged, they will get no more deposits from me.


Cliffs:

Has the whole world gone crazy? Am I the only one around here who gives a **** about the rules? Mark it zero!

I agree with you saying the people running the site are clearly immoral **** heads willing to steal money from players, and most of the regulatory bodies are a complete joke.

I don't think being based in island countries is that damning, since it's more likely for tax purposes than legal ones. There's nothing that really supports that. Even with what's going on with Cereus (I haven't followed their liquidity issues super closely, since I think anybody getting slammed by it had it coming), they never rigged the games. Which is what any sane person who felt it was unfair would do.

That's why this thread is more interesting as an exercise in critical thinking than in supporting the sites.

I have no problem with a person saying: I just don't trust these guys, and so I won't play and I don't think you should play either. That's a rational approach to take.

Still, just because there are rational reasons not to play doesn't mean that any allegation should be supported. We can separate out different issues.

Would I be surprised if I learned that a site tried to rig a deal? Not particularly. Would I be surprised to learn that they'd managed to do it profitably and invisibly - absolutely!

DONT BE SURPRISED. ITS BEEN GOING ON SINCE OLP BEGAN.

I would strongly encourage you to read "Everything is Obvious: *Once You Know the Answer", then try to understand why what you call common sense may be the wrong reason to leave a site, or to base your assertion that sites are rigged upon.

Gotta get that shillin' money for the holidays.