By definition, to be a fact, a thing must be provable.

Post your complete hand history and prove your facts.

On second thoughts the entertainment was getting very repetitive and dull. So the anger (fake or not) was probably justified.

Time for the riggies to raise their game. The audience is getting bored.

Lets face it, both parties in here love chatting. Theres no reason for someone like Monteroy to waste minutes and hours (in total) with posting stuff on the internet which actually shouldn't bother him at all. Moreoever people like this Nash guy enjoy upsetting people on purpose. But most of his posts were just hilarious and impossible to be taken serious. Either a troll (most likely) or a convinced fish who truly believes the games are rigged. Your call.

In my opinion there is no reason to ask anyone (except for the true beliebers ) for proof. There is none, there probably never will be because ... and the story goes on. There is none. Solved for both parties

In addition there are plenty of other Riggies (how you call them), who are simply using the forum to blow off. I myself wouldn't bother my gf on tilt with some crazy rigged stories, if I could use some unknown fellows on the internet for that. Instead of spewing away plenty of money like some other players might do it, I close the tables and complain out loud. (which is kinda difficult if no one is around) So dropping an cynical line here and there helps a lot.

And that is what this thread is used for by some users here, except for those who obv enjoy the rigged-yelling-stories because they.. well simply got the time. Which is totally fine aswell ofc.

Wish you all the best possible START TO THE NEW YEAR! Salut! To more stories in 2015.

OK I don't know what I did to have the thread closed but everything said by me within it is plausible and based on scientific facts.

FOR EXAMPLE: The entanglement of photons is a driving force behind miniaturization of cpu microchips - i.e. components can be no smaller than the wavelength of a photon. If photons are entangled, however, then re-joined, the constructive interference allows the same charge to be transmitted at 1/4 of the wavelength.

LASERs are a prime example of QM phenomenon, indeed, they work based on our understanding of QM - such as all electrons or photons within a lasing material being indistinguishable and occupying all available space at once - the first and last photons emitted by a continuous LASER are "the same", i.e. some/all are definitely entangled.

It is a simple scientific fact that when a lasing material becomes such (i.e. one photon is incident on the lasing atom causing another IDENTICAL photon to be released and strike another atom, then the photons cascade into a coherent (in-phase) ray, or LASER beam), that all the photons in the system are one and the same photon until they are released. Even upon release one at a time (like Quantis' RNG), a photon can still split into > 1 photon and pertinently, originating from a common source and likely entangled with future singularly released photons, share information with past, present and future photons emanating from said common, continuous source event.

Nowhere did I say anything about rigged, Bobo, and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a 10-second power re-set to guarantee the most stringent true randomness possible for on-line players.

There will be a back-up LASER. Even if the prime LASER requires a certain cool-down or warm-up period, system analytic or software loading time, the back-up LASER could be set up to run with a virtually continuous service. Likely though it can just be turned on and off at the plug for 10 seconds lol. Too much to ask? I guess if it's too much to ask just to be taken seriously when I talk about known science, it probably is, at least in this iteration of 4-D space-time

Stopped reading here. Maybe you should visit RGT, there are many people who believe their "knowledge" is based on ""facts"".

Regarding the bs you posted: you claim to be a man of science? then present your evidence in a way a man of science would do it....baseless ramblings and claims only earns you the title: "blabbering-wannabe-i know-so-much-about-poker-and-math-and-physics"-guy....

'The entanglement of photons'

At least this riggie is introducing some new **** to the game.

Best riggie gimmick yet!

JorgeLorenzo: Your status has been updated to: MasterTroll

I lol hard at this, he should post his entire hand history? Say to prove something u need millions of HHs, should he post them all? When I dont have anything relevant to say i usually just dont say anything, keeps things simple u should try.

It's not like this is some kind of punishment - we just keep all the rigged discussion in one thread so we don't keep going over the same ground again and again. I closed your thread rather than merging it, like we usually do, because I didn't want to mess up the poll in this thread.

Actually, that's almost all you talked about, aside from your quantum entanglement theory. Just because you never use the word doesn't mean you didn't say anything about it:

While there may be an inference given that may be taken as "rigged", there is an important distinction between me and this thread.

First I voted that poker is NOT rigged.

Most importantly, "rigged", suggests favouritism towards one party or another based on cognitive decisions taken, whereas what I am talking about is entirely different - i.e the quantum entanglement is effecting results independently of any human decision making processes as QM effects of this nature are not currently being considered (by anyone, even riggies).

Anyway, my point is that there should be a cold 10-second re-start of the LASER to mitigate any possible influence of quantum phenomena (which DO exist and we KNOW they exist but NOBODY knows WHY or WHAT ultimate effect on a card game QM phenomena may have). This doesn't seem unreasonable to me at all, indeed, just the mere possibility that QM phenomena are in effect, should be enough to motivate on-line poker sites to remove this uncertainty.

It's all bull**** .... and Spin and Go is fake as hell

Could you answer this question please?

I already did but here goes:

The RNG functions because of quantum variation (reflection/non-reflection) - something nobody on earth ever has (or likely ever will) be able to fully understand (Einstein, Bohr, everyone since are still like what the holy good spooky distance?). This makes it TRULY random. Pokerstars use the word "entropy" to describe further "back-up randomness" with regards the RNG, however, entropy explicitly means chaos or disorder, when in fact the input sources (e.g. player mouse clicks) are part of a larger quantum system. Ironically further inputs to the basis quantum events may add order to chaos for one classical and one quantum reason.

Classical - humans are creatures of habit. Mouse clicks follow definite patterns for individual players (fold quickly, take your time, etc) and on a biological level, the absolute variation in clicks is defined by the range of finger movements and thought processes (also hardware, software and internet).

Quantum - There are AT LEAST 7 dimensions, I think infinite dimensions and/or parallel universes (these are "facts" any astrophysicist or theoretical physicist (inc Einstein) will be willing to offer you).

When an electron orbits a nucleus (electrons may be considered as pure energy, even though they have mass - photons, of course, are pure, mass-less energy and freely interchangeable with electrons AND mass), the electron occupies ALL space within it's orbit (and variants caused by atomic vibration, space-time distortions (gravity)). This is impossible. There would have to be many trillions of electrons to occupy all of the possible spaces in the orbit, yet it remains a fact that electrons exist as a particle of both mass AND charge in more than one place at the SAME TIME. Photons and electrons are omnipresent. Bizarre beyond belief. Right now, the energy (photons/mass) created in the source event (big bang) are still entangled across all time and space - space-time is a fluid fabric which can bend, distort and even travel from infinity and back, infinite times per nanosecond. I must stress again these facts are NOT scientifically in question, rather, they ARE science as we best know it. I haven't even got to the mind-blowing bit. The omnipresence of matter is predictable and most easily described by alpha particles (2 protons, 2 neutrons) escaping from heavy nuclides by mysteriously "tunnelling" through insurmountable barriers. This of course describes the radiation we all know from Uranium/Plutonium/Potassium etc so it's beyond question (observable science, e.g. Newton's Apple, even if we don't understand it). The only reasonable explanation for these phenomena (quantum mechanical tunnelling, i.e. "borrowed" energy) is alternate dimensions. Electons, photons, stuff generally it seems, exists in infinite dimensions and only becomes "real", i.e. physical or realised in our 4 dimensions (time is the 4th) when we observe it.

This blew Einstein's mind and is one of the few things he ever got wrong (as well as taking a quanta as X/YZ^4 instead of log f(x), I mean what a moron!). Einstein was convinced matter was "pre-ordered", whereas his colleague Bohr (as in Bohr Radius) was equally convinced the state of matter (Schrodinger's cat) wasn't defined until we observed it. Einstein's view:- You have 2 gloves, left and right. You place the left glove in one box, the right in the other. Even if you do not know which box is which, the left glove was always in one box, the right glove in the other. WRONG! Bohr's view: - The cat in the box is alive, dead and every possible interim, until we open the box and find out - i.e. at the quantum level, the gloves in Einstein's boxes are both left AND right until we make a definitive assessment. This has been proven by experiment at least twice now and that experiment in itself is another 300000000000 words. The neatest way to sum it up is Einstein's now famous phrase, "spooky action at a distance".

So, I assume we are somewhat up to speed now and capable of grasping the profoundness of what I am about to say:

The photons emitted by the LASER of the RNG are entangled through space, time and infinite dimensions. They are sharing information with some, if not all, of the past, present and future photons from the common source (the precise moment the laser was turned on, remember, when the lasing material activates, all excited photons are simultaneously and spontaneously identical (coherent, in phase, constructive interference) within every atom of the lasing material). Even released as singularities photons may "multiply" (Young's double slit experiment) and share both cause AND effect with PAST and FUTURE photons. THUS, it is entirely logical and reasonable to postulate that the entangled sum of cause and effect leads to outcomes not described by computer model (i.e. Gaussian distribution), indeed this property is not only assumed but incorporated as a virtue of the quantum RNG over a classical RNG (that quantum events cannot be described by CPU modelling, not the entangled sum of cause and effect).

So in the simplest possible laymen's terms (which you didn't want but are now desperate for), the initial outcomes from the first hand of poker played using the quantum RNG are related to all future outcomes from the same continuous LASER source due to quantum entanglement. Therefore some players always run good, especially against certain opponents, and others always run bad, especially against certain opponents, and this phenomenon will perpetuate until the quantum cycle of entanglement is broken by providing a different catalyst (fresh electrons from a discrete stream) to the LASER governing the RNG.

I hope that clarifies things for you

A1+ troll ...

I really like the idea of bad luck being attributable to stale electrons ...

As exciting as it would be to play you 50 times at micro stakes, pretty sure that would not be a particularly productive use of my time, however if you insist then we can play 50 games to determine who is the best overall player. Usually for these silly challenges I require the buy ins to be higher, but we can do it at $22 each given your recent binks.

Limit Razz
Limit Omaha 8
PLO
Stud (you can choose regular or hi/lo)
NL Holdem

Feel free to send me a PM and we can start the Razz ones in the next few days.


Best of luck in 2015, and you should consider posting your sharkscope graph in this thread

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54...-graphs-61228/

Hopefully for you the results of these two specific tournaments are more representative of your skill than the 13,000 prior to them, and regardless, congratulations on using some bankroll management, as many in your scenario of a lucky bink or two give back a huge chunk of it before they think about that concept.

All the best.


P.S. My sympathy that your two significant binks over the years came after that crazy change in how Greek players are taxed on a daily basis.

JorgeLorenzo

If it's impossible to tell who gets which cards next, and what they may be, and it's not rigged to give some players particular cards, then it's not rigged.

So what are you doing in this thread?

I was wondering how that post got here, and that certainly allows a riggie to have fun with the concept that I posted here even when I did not post here!

The irony is that I was one of the few that thought that person in his thread was likely telling the truth, but in the end he does not really appreciate some aspects of the truth of his situation. Pretty standard ego reaction, but he deserved to have his account closure situation resolved properly, once he calmed down and cooperated with the standard information/documentation requests. Whether he thinks he is a great player due to 1-2 binks after 13,000+ games of losing is his choice. I will certainly use his graph as a proof of a "winning player" with a "positive ROI" the next time someone indicates that is the only measure of skill in this thread!

Bring on better quality riggies for 2015!

P.S. I also posted in the Matt Savage / Epic Poker League financial settlement thread if you feel the need to copy that here as well. Perhaps that payment was rigged...

Sorry. I haven't read that post yet.

I only copied the other post here as I thought some of our regs would like to support your usual pomposity one way or the other. Maybe I should run a book on the game instead?

Let's get it on!

Have a happy New Year.

So that's why I've been losing.

It all makes sense now.

These are NOT facts, they are theories.

And Einstein will not be willing to offer them. He's dead.

A theory is not what you think it is. A theory is a framework that explains observed facts, it is the highest degree of certainty science can get. You´re looking for the word hypothesis.

Jorge I agree with u when u say it's not truly random to have a laser generating the numbers, however, the reason why neither a pc code can generate random numbers is that NOTHING ON THE UNIVERSE IS RANDOM, like u for sure know, everything in the universe describable as a variable exists according to the laws of physics or laws that mankind has not yet been able to uncover. Events that r humanly impossible to calculate are assumed as random, such as the throwing of a dice. Like the mouse movements, the action of throwing a dice is specific and has repetitive patterns deppending on who is throwing it, yet it's assumed random. Bear in mind that the people at pokerstars that work with this laser probably know more about the subject than you and me together. I believe that for the number generation they will a use combination of a ton of outcomes on their laser and the other sources, seems unlikely that they would pick a range of outcomes to generate each card that wouldnt make the dealing seemingly random. They must have tested it for really really large samples. If u go to rational group's recruting site (like i did) u ll see that they have very high requirements as for the staff they hire, they probably have highly qualified mathmaticians and engineers that would not make such basic mistakes.

This is not a science forum. Had I been talking to scientist, or even an intelligent layman, you might be correct.

As it is I'm talking to an idiotic troll and you are talking bollux.

To avoid making a fool of yourself, in future, you might note that before you start sounding off about what a word means, you should consult a dictionary and find the meaning most appropriate to the audience for whom the word was intended.

The majority of people reading this will always understand theory to mean hypothesis - even if they occasionally encounter a case where it doesn't.

The vast majority of the remainder will have the intelligence to remember the target audience and automatically understand the meaning intended.

Millions? No.

Thousands? Yes.

Again, as we keep saying over, and over, and over - it's a question of statistics. Poker is a game of statistics and statistics are only reliable over long measurements.

If we "keep things simple" by accepting a single hand history it's akin to flipping a coin twice and determining that because we got heads twice the coin is rigged.