I did say "not counting compression options".

I do agree that by using a word like "countless" I might have exageratted but my premise is that there is solid amount of people online as you can already see within this poll on top of the page. 34.59% believe its rigged while 7.34% are undecided - overall 40% of people that have doubts towards online poker. Now you can say it doesnt represent anything, but then again there are also many websites (like on pokerscout) with alot of people, on youtube, on facebook etc... so to make it look like there is handful of lunatics is a bit off. Even when its only like 10% of all people combined, its still worth to respect that, else its like ignoring democratic votes in politics. Lets say you have 5 parties, and 2 of them get 51% combined while the rest shares the other 49% of votes - following your logic you would simply ignore the 49% cause they are "people who cant be convinced what is right" - but even in politics the 49% have a value and influence.

Your point of everyone simply stating that its a conspiracy afterwards is not valid, because involving e.g. well-known universities and mathematicians would be simply a normal step towards transparency as we can see with other companies these days or open source communities. Without even trying I dont see the point of claiming how a reaction would be. Of course its not possible to force people into believing something, but the more reputable institutions are backing up and verifying online gaming, I dont see how this could not have a positive effect overall.

The detailed way you ask about, I dont know the process of how a university would do this, but I already believe, as mentioned above, that the sole involvement is much more trustworthy - considering the size of the industry and scandals in the digital world - than any of the self-regulation and freelance companies today hired today. Basically we are talking about peanuts moneywise for something that companies could use even for marketing but instead it appears they are ignoring it on purpose - hence my previous posting where I try to question the reason for this. Poker is on a decline for years, and I like online poker, I honestly believe with his approach there would be also a new customer base joining the online poker world.

I believe this thread has been created for a discussion and I think everyone who wishes more security should propose ideas or try to find errors in todays online gaming world, thats also something that works the same way in any other industry. Its always better to encourage than simply shut down, cause if somehow something should be "off", its also those to blame who tried to convince others to not even try.

This is not about attacking the companies, but the silence towards true independent verification is by logic a bit akward.

Overall, I dont see how any of this can not help, even if its just a little bit.

Is Citigal not as good to you as "universities"?

Do note that 100 million decks is only 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000008% of the total decks that could be dealt (yes, really).

Even if you only care about the top 23 cards, it's still only 0.000000000000000000000000001% of the total 23-of-52-card decks.

I do know Citigal and I do know who Paco Hope is - I believe he is a very capable security analyst and also a funny character, no mistrust or negative opinion from my side whatsoever towards him/them. The problem I see and which perhaps is misunderstood in my original posting, is the scale of this industry and the history of holes/errors in the digital world that can be exploided.

Having said that, for instance having an independent company that requires a security check, picking them to do the job is an option that I see no problems with. They do have a good reputation, but in an worldwide industry the survaillence of it cant be handled by a 2-person team that is issuing a certificate valid for 2 years (Thats what they did usually when im not mistaken). It has be controlled in a constant public way - closer to the idea of the open source community. Why should this not be benefitial for all? The aspect of money in this case is, again, a misunderstanding of costs/profit/size of industry and perhaps there would be even universities doing this for next-to-nothing just living off the exposure. The logic behind all this is also simply that reputable universities certainly have more to lose in terms of image and costs than a private company that could dissolve and regroup under a new name when necessary. I believe that line of logic is comprehensible.

Now people would ask "and how this is supposed to happen, who is deciding what and when etc." - the idea behind all this is to start at least somewhere, and to slowly move away from a closed community (industry & their respective verficiation companies) to an open platform free for everyone to participate, led by e.g. universities (thats just one idea) and being encouraged to help make it the best transparent and fair platform for everyone to comprehend hence silencing when necessary those who just run around claiming things without any valid proof. Else its just an endless circle but I also do believe that due to e.g. open source, there have been many positive developments, going as far as huge companies in the software industry jumping on the bandwagon and profiting from it. Recent scandals involving the magnitude of huge companies (the spying scandals i mean) secretly breaking their own terms/conditions and obligations should also be a wake up a call, even though "its just poker" (its a huge industry)

Therefor, defending aggressively the status-quo of current affairs is counterproductive, trust is based on development and transparancy else we would still live in caves and fight with out neighbors for food every day (yes yes, i know some might argue we still are doing both in some methaphorical way)

One more thing, I cant put my hand in the fire for it, but you are all free to ask Paco himself about it, hes very active on various social media websites and I think he is polite enough to send a quick reply back concering his take on improving the current state of verifications.

It should be mandatory for every online gaming business to undergo regular (monthly or even weekly when there are enough volunteers) monitoring/verficiation.

Perhaps the poker community, those with doubts, should start a kickstarter/fundraiser campaign and invest that money to contact/hire a reputable institution of their choice - I dont see a problem with that.

Do they cover their tracks so well that only Vegans can unearth them?

If the supposed rigging is "very sophisticated", it seems pretty amazing that only stupid people like you claim to have spotted how they work.

But maybe you're secretly in possession of a Nobel Prize for Mathematics.

When we talk about people who say things like "there are way too many bad beats on Site X", or "my AA never holds up on Site Y", then no. If patterns are so obviously detectable as to be noticed by mere observation, they would be trivially easy to prove statistically. That's just common sense, and I hope you can see that.

Of course more sophisticated rig theories that you're trying to come up with are a different matter.

To some extent, nothing, especially on anonymous tables. Now, I'm pretty sure that on Bodog they offer hand histories, after 24 hours, that show ALL hole cards, so that at least allows player to prove suspicious play - but they can't pin the histories outside of a single session to one particular player without the site's help. And on sites that are not anonymous, I think there would be a certain amount of superusing a person could get away with and have it be very unlikely to be detected. But it would require some very, very careful play - I'm inclined to think that the same energy could be put into playing well and net similar results. The more they take advantage of superusing ability to make it worthwhile, the more detectable they become. And if they use it at high stakes so a smaller edge makes them more money, they also come under much closer scrutiny as the player pool gets smaller and much, much savvier.

The bolded part is important, and takes us back to a debate we've had in this thread many times before.

Of course there's an amount of rigging you could set up that would never be detectable. If you were to rig one hand in a million, no matter how outrageously, it could never be proved from the outside. Or two hands. Ten. But of course 10 hands in a million isn't going to help the site either. Until someone proves otherwise, I'm of the belief that once a rig becomes significant enough for it to be a benefit to the site (accounting for the programming and coverup costs), it would be detectable.

As for your particular scenario of moving around hands in your million hand sample, as others have said, that's no longer random, and should be detectable. But even if it wasn't - how the hell is a site going to use that to their advantage? How do you take a predetermined deal and generate more rake from it without having any idea what the given players will do with the hand?

But 40% of what? I really hope you don't think that's 40% of 2+2ers. It's 40% of a self-selected sample. 40% of people who are inclined to open a "Poker is rigged" thread and vote in it have doubts. Well, actually less than 40% when you remove the joke votes and riggies who have used multiple accounts to vote.

I'm pretty confident that if there was a way to poll all 2+2ers, the number would be much, much lower. But no, I have no way of proving that. Just seems like common sense to me.

The whole "McFly...", all-caps, "I'm done here" routine has gotten really, really old. Enough already.

There was another riggie who kept going on about universities saving the day, kind of wondering if this is a second account of that (if so be sure to vote again in the poll, the riggie side despite a ton of multi accounting can't seem to get 35% support in a riggie thread). Aside from the odds that "universities" may not want to be associated with gambling of any kind, the reality is that even if every university agreed to do whatever it is you are saying they should do - nothing would change. Riggies would still believe it is rigged.

A couple of years ago there were many riggies proclaiming with certainty that US regulated sites would solve everything. They would make people comfortable about the sites, and they would then crush all the evil sites that used non US regulatory bodies.

At the time many of us said that would change nothing (ignoring the irony that riggies seem to trust governments - generally the source of most conspiracies), and here we are now with US regulated sites in some states, and within no time there have been riggies who see patterns and know it is rigged. As expected, nothing changed. Paranoid gonna paranoid.

This has nothing to do with defending the status quo, but what good would "universities" do if in the end the riggies still think it is rigged against them. On a different forum one guy posted how he believes it is rigged for people who live in G8 countries. What university will change beliefs like that?

In the end I still have $5,000 waiting for any riggie to prove a site like Pokerstars has a rigged RnG. All of them see the rig (albeit different and often contradictory rigs), but none can prove it despite it being so easy to detect.

Perhaps they need someone like you to lead the way and organize the riggies to come up with a Unified Riggie Theory. You can even ask some "universities" to back it. You talk about starting somewhere, then I suggest you start by organizing the riggies in this thread to form a union with you as the leader and together you can use your brain trust to change the world as we know it.

Start a kickstarter campaign and see how it goes, though you may find that riggies tend to have no disposable money. Still, that is a start, and someone needs to do it, so why not you?

All the best.

Great, another idiot troll, have fun

Ok... Just go ahead and let me know how you would like me to think, act, and post... But I'm not gonna stop KNOWING that some online poker sites are obviously rigged...

Right, because telling you we've had enough of posting in all-caps (which is widely understood to be the Internet equivalent of yelling) and telling us "I'm done here" over and over again when you're clearly not is just the same as telling you how to think, act, and post.

And yes, we know that you will continue to "know" it's rigged no matter what anyone posts. Guys like you make for some really great discussion.

The funny thing is... I might take all your guys' chips at a poker table, or on an online poker site that is not rigged or handicapped LOL... So you guys can win the little wars on the forums as much as you want, but I might win the battles at the tables where it matters... GOOD GAME... GOOD LUCK...

You might do a lot of things.

You might catch a leprechaun tomorrow (this is probably less likely than you winning a poker hand though).

On the larger sites with lots of intelligent high volume players, this happens every day by the players themselves. The card output itself is the only thing that matters, after all.

@ GUSTAVO,
A university study was done on a major online poker site. I stumbled on it a few years ago and was later posted in this thread by another poster. Maybe monteroy can find a link to it if he is kind enough, he is good at posting links. It concluded the site was rigged.

That "university" study was not affiliated with any university. If I remember they did some testing with play money SnGs on Full Tilt and then said how many times certain hands won at showdown and compared them to the odds of a single person being dealt that hand.

Shockingly stronger hands happened a lot more often, but they ignored the fact that having multiple people dealt hands will increase that, as they were comparing those results to essentially a wikipedia odds page of a single person being dealt a flush/straight/trips etc in isolation.

A lot of riggies preached on about it despite it being flawed in such a simple way, but modern riggies have ignored that "study," along with the photoshopped 5 aces hand, because even riggies eventually learn that some screenshots, videos and studies are too stupid. Seems like you still believe in that "study" which is kind of old school riggie. Good for you!

By the way, I did play today for the first time in over a month, and despite only playing a handful of games I likely had a three hand sequence that will likely top any riggie hand sequence from today. Would be a fun one to see a theory created about, and no doubt if it happened to a riggie it would be proof of something.

http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-h...377_BC0A74C418
http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-h...380_8BE2C918AB
http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-h...383_D30EBAC1FC

If I had survived we could have seen if I would be dealt AA the next hand...


All the best.

Well, there is not much interest for it or ideas for a change on this platform as people take refugee in name-calling instead of dealing with this matter.

As usual, I can only recommend to be careful, as everyone else is recommending and perhaps in the future we will see a more transparent industry and dont have to rely on "independent" regulation.

Having said that, I just saw another thread about some account closed... what happens actually with all that "blocked" money that cant be claimed? I mean, when I make some company of my choice and then I just withhold money and refer to my T&Cs, I can keep that money? Perhaps I should open of "these" kind of companies

No need for answer, was just loud thinking - anyway, I go my way again and you all have fun in future. Au Revoir.

Do you mean the Online Poker Watchdog test of iPoker? If that's the one you're referring to, that's far from the conclusion they came to.

I simply suggested that you should try to organize your fellow riggies. Form a chat group on skype, run a kickstarter campaign etc. Why will you not bother doing that (especially since you suggested the Kickstarter idea), and why will no riggie bother doing that. The best the riggie collective can point to are dusty youtube videos from that magicguy.

Tell you what, if you personally are the one that can provide proof that a site like Pokerstars has a rigged RnG (whether by yourself or with help) then I will triple teh reward I have offered to $15,000.

You say there is not much interest for ideas or change, yet here I am offering you a healthy reward and offering suggestions for you to organize like minded people to study your beliefs as a collective.

In that thread I included links to many more just like that. You may not want to take those posters at total face value. People leave out information nearly all the time when they post those threads.

One of these days a riggie will attempt to muster all the riggies to form a line of defense, perhaps even shouting "HOLD!!!!" like from Braveheart as the evil shills charge with their annoying logic and reasoning. It seems you are not up to that challenge, and would rather chat then vanish rather than be a needed force of change.

All the best.

The worthless posts from gustavo remind me of this sweet little petition:

Every rigturd claims that there are soooooo many people who are concerned about rigged pokersites.

This petition has been running for several weeks now....11 people signed.

Does anyone think a pokersite needs to prove the fairness of their deal for the raging masses of concerned poker players?

I understand that this money is given to charity, and there is an item listing this each year in the pokerstars filings.

You have only been here for a few minutes; the way you jump to conclusions about things you have zero knowledge of makes me think you should stick around, as you will fit right in around here.

Hi, vegan!

Just putting it out there, I'm now $320 up at 20nl on 888. Yet I still can't beat 2nl zoom on PS.com. What a joke of a site Stars is.

On 888, my blue line is positive and my redline is negative, which is pretty standard. But on Stars it's the other way round. The reason is I never ever get dealt a hand so I end up having to bluff much more often. The Stars rig actually makes me alter my playstyle, it's obscene. Plus the Stars river screwover rig manages to wreck my blue line. I've actually started calling those river raises just so I know for a fact that Stars is screwing me on the river, it's only $2 and it helps me build a clear picture in my mind of the rig that is going on. The amount of times villain catches a lucky river card on Stars is truly outrageous, in my database there's hundreds of hands where I've been rivered, time and time again, and it's more often than not when I'm OOP so there's less opportunity to check it behind as well.

Meanwhile on 888 at 20nl I'm winning at a nice 7bb/100 clip and am close to moving up to 30nl. The reason is simple - there's no rig to protect the higher VIP status players. If you're one of the better players on the table you will win in the long run, if you're not then you'll lose. That's how it should be.

What's your screen name on these sites?