EvilGreebo, I'm not betting money on something like this, but the site is undeniably rigged and anyone who has played there will testify to this.

You'd all just say any anomalies in the data were 'variance' anyway. That seems to be the catch all phrase around here when faced with stuff that's obviously rigged.

I don't think the deal is rigged and I have played there.

Well, Mike just proved you wrong...

Do you know what variance means?

Hint: Winning poker players do.

But dude, I SPECIFIED exactly what tolerance levels would apply. There is a predictable average number of times a runner runner straight draw will hit. Average does not mean perfect. A coin will, on average, flip heads up 50% of the time - but it won't flip heads/tails/heads/tails/heads/tails/heads/tails every time. It'll do h/t/t/t/h/h/t/t/t/h/h/t/h/t/t/h/t and over the LONG haul you'll approach a perfect 50 50.

But variance is what you call it when the coin flips t/t/t - 3 tails in a row - shouldn't happen if the average was guaranteed but the average isn't guaranteed, so it happens.

Like I said before runner runner straight draws will hit about 4% of the time. That is 1 time in 20. We have a challenge in seeing if this number hits because we don't always see your opponents hole cards so its very difficult to say how many times runner/runner straights actually hit. But we can look at the times we DID see your opponents hole cards and a r-r straight was a possibility. (While we'll look at it we can also look at the times your opponent saw YOUR hole cards and you hit a runner-runner straight...)

But - of course - I get it. It's easier to just explain away the possibility that you're wrong by accusing me of planning to stack the deck against you. Everyone lacks integrity but you - that's a far better perspective to have than the one we see, which is 'maybe you just suck at poker'.

Wat? You high bro? There are tons of 888 regs who will **** a brick on your forehead over something like this. Don't try to cast your personal failures on others.

If I'm a winning player I can't suck that badly relative to the stakes I play. The only reason I'm not at 50nl already is because of the rig dragging my winrate down into single figures.

I don't need to see any figures to know runner runner draws hit A LOT more than 4%. And way more than 13% or whatever your 'tolerance' level is as well. I cba providing hand histories because you'd all work out some way to 'interpret' the data so that it could be explained by 'variance'. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

What stakes tho? They only rig the micros games.

Wow. Impressive.

I offer you a solid prop - $200 for your $100 - with a neutral third party judge that we both agree on deciding the validity...

And you accuse me of planning to rig it up front.

Fine - you've rejected the offer. I accept your rejection, and I laugh in your face at your unwillingness to put your money where your mouth is. Offer off the table. Enjoy losing that money.

So to clarify, you're saying without a doubt that a poker operator licensed in the United States of America is running a rigged game?
Oh, and they're risking their reputation along with probably millions of dollars all to rig the games that are the least profitable to rig. Got it.

Hello! I do not know what is with ipoker network, but the games there are everything but fair. Got a very good deal in december 2013, so I move from PS to ipoker. I play micro and low stakes SNGs. On PS I have about 13% ROI from 1.5$-7$ over a 10k sample. And on PS I am about 115BI under EV line. But man, after 2k sample on Ipoker, have 4% ROI,lol. That is very strange because players there are even worse than on PS. So I should have a bigger ROI right? There are only 2 reasons, the game is fixed or my mind is overwhelmed by so much colluding that I think the game is fixed. I played before on Ipoker in 2012 about 3k SNGs and was like 35BI under EV, probably I forgot why I move from them, but I was quckly reminded. Advice: just get the hell away from Ipoker network and stick to more thrusty and legit sites like PS.

I would appreciate Monteroy being banned. He is just 100% a jerk to every legitimate poster.

I realize this is an internet forum, but come on, treat people like human beings.

What happens to the hand histories?

I am happy to give to a trusted poster ( and will even pay an hourly rate for the work), I just don't want to make all my information public domain.

My theory is that I run way below EV in "important" all-ins and way above EV in shortstack type situations, so overall statistics look ok.

The limited analysis I have done has verified my theory, but I only had undergraduate statistics and am an expert in poker ( 17 year professional) not in looking at statistics.

It would give me great peace of mind to know for sure one way or the other.

Monteroy's been pleasant to me in my experience with him, but of course I'm an illegitimate poster.

Got an 888 winter freeroll ticket so decided to play since it was free.

Just confirmed everything I knew about the site. I'm sitting in the button with Q5s. Make a minraise to steal the blinds. Donk 3bets me. I 4bet bluff him all in...and he calls with Q3o!!

Guess what? A couple of 3's come on the flop. The stupid donk sucked out on me because I wasn't a newly registered player and he was.

That hand was 59%/41%, say 3/2. You win it 3 times, he wins it twice, out of five times played, on any site or in any poker room in the world, whatever five random cards come up.

Not the greatest hand to give to prove your case.

The newly registered players win those hands 100% of the time though, this is the problem. New player boomswitch is alive and well over on 888. The worst site for rigging I have ever been on.

[x] bad poker player loses to worse player on a coin flip
[ ] media is alerted
[ ] online poker is rigged

SEND ME YOUR HAND HISTORIES AND PROVE IT!

Prove that claim and I guarantee that you will receive your own special undertitle.

He has no need for an undertitle, MH.
Such an altruist, he knows it's rigged but has no interest in proving it to save others from being scammed.

Are you kidding? The guy is hilarious. Let's face it, this is Monteroy's existence.



Just sit back and enjoy the show.

They sit on a server until you give someone the link.

Oh, definitely, when you're trying to bring a billion dollar industry to its knees the FIRST thing you've got to protect against is Random J ShovesALot finding your hand histories, studying them for hours to try and bumhunt someone who studies poker.

For example, when I go fishing, I ignore the big easily accessible spots loaded with fish and spend hours getting to a spot that may or may not have a single fish. Solid strat.

Can't wait to hear why you're keeping those details a secret...

The odds of an impartial party looking at your data and telling you it's normal and you accepting it is zero.

Wow Q 5 didn't hold up, alert the Media and where do you get off getting mad at anyone but yourself when you push the "donk" all in with Q5 and lose. After years of carbon bovada, 888 wsop borgota are Godsends.

Quick, why is QJo a far better favorite than Q5o against Q3o? Hint: it has almost nothing to do with straight possibilities.

This site is interesting, but their methodology is fundamentally flawed. They found one out of many tests that found a significant number of bad beats at iPoker.

http://www.ispokerrigged.com/is_ipoker_rigged.html

However, even though the level is "1 in 53,000," you test enough parameters and eventually one of them will be a few standard deviations from what's expected. What they don't show is how much 3 standard deviations is over a sample of hundreds of thousands of hands. With the SD = pq/SQRT(n), the SD for, say, AA losing to underpair must be 0.001% or something. So it's "significant" that AA actually loses to KK 18.004% of the time vs. 18.0001% of the time. The numbers are completely made up, but you get the idea. For the rig to actually be worthwhile over all hands, say a couple of percent, then the difference over hundreds of thousands of hands would be hundreds of standard deviations.

Because of chops?

Q5 and Q3 tie 22%

sharp - must be

Yupp.

Boo, I meant that question for riggies, not between us shills.

They actually tie 44% of the time. Those ties get you 22% of the pot on average, but the tie actually happens 44% of the time.

For when a hand actually wins, it's 34% to 22%. Conditional on when a hand wins, that's 60% to 40%.

Meanwhile, QJo and Q3o only tie 8% of the time. Of the times when a hand wins, it's 75% to 25%.