PokerTracker is rigged. I think it is owned by the poker sites to give out rigged results that conform to statistical probability.

Hahahaha...

I'm amazed this is the first time I've seen anyone post this. Rek, you've given them a whole different angle to use now.

Can you prove it's not true, you shill? I mean any time it is proved beyond doubt, PT simply put in a patch to correct it.

The truth will out. All it takes is a genius to think outside the box and expose the online poker cartel. I am that man and the net is closing. Be afraid shill, you have little time left to carry on your rigged scam.

Who is with me? come on guys, cast off those silver hats and fight. The revolution is here.

nh

Juk

I think you should consider the timing aspect very carefully.

And is it a real deal?

+1

Hey SooperFish are you signing up to my revolution?

Poor old Sooperfish.

Still in denial about the fact that he sucks at poker.

Still trying to blame it on the deal.

Still being a rigtard.

So sad.

Why don't you bog off you shill. Who is paying you? Can you prove you don't work for RiverStars or FullRiggedPoker? No thought not.

I thought it would be profitable to take the Partystar's shilling.

Whats this about a revolution Rek?

I m already never depositing on an online poker site ever again. I just play with the little I have left after cashing out in january.

[ ] poor

[ ] old

[ ] suck at poker

[x] blaming it on the deal

[x] rigtard

[ ] sad

[x] qpw is a paid shill/troll acting in defence of online poker no matter what argument/evidence is presented

[x] qpw needs new 2+2 account as its become very obvious what he s here for. Get a new name your too obvious shill.

Get out of the forum/threads shill.

I can't tell you how I know this, but there are links between the software developers of Golden Tee Golf and PokerTracker.
Just recently I posted an example of a hand where my opponent (vastly inferior, imo) had made a series of horrible decisions but made his hand on the river after putting all his money in WAY behind on the turn. I pointed out that since it was a tournament, the "rigged for action" theory couldn't apply. Also, that player didn't go on to cash either, so the idea it's "rigged for fish" didn't pan out either.

I was then told by a known rigtard...

"That's poker."

Oh, so that's poker. Gotchya.

+1

qpw ignores all the evidence and always has done. I'm going to list it all below and see what he has to say about it:




































Ok, that's all the evidence I can think of. Just wait till I get some more together.

That's poker, ldo.

So, I'm the original poster and I was not trying to further some acrimonious debate about whether online poker is fixed. Especially for a site as large as Full Tilt, it would make absolutely no business sense for them to rig it, as someone would eventually find out and they would be ruined when that happened.

Acknowledging that, I do find it bizarre that by ratios that seem reversed, hands that are dominating lose all-ins pre-flop with such frequency, and this tourney was a great example. AQ beats AK, AK beats KK, A2 beats KK within the space of six hands total. This is not a one time occurrence, or it wouldn't have been worth posting. No I don't have a statistically valid database sample to back it up, as I don't go all-in pre-flop very often.

I also didn't intend this to be a debate about my playing skills, but just out of curiosity which of the all-in calls should I have folded, first AK, second AK, or KK, or all three?

Always fold KK pf as A flops like 70% of the time obv

Sorry if you got jumped on and you are NOT a rigtard.

You do, nontheless, have a problem with probability and it is this:

You do not appreciate that when billions of a certain even happen every year there will be a great many VERY unusual occurances.

For example, suppose you said to everyone playing on-line poker at a certain moment: "Please find a fair coin and throw it sixteen times".

There is a very good chance that at least one person woul throw 16 heads or 16 tails.

It's extremely unlikely that there would NOT be several people who threw a series of a dozen heads or tails.

If you see a 1 in 20 hand event, followed immediately and contiguously by 4 similarly unlikely events you need to realise that that is a 1 in 3.2 million probability and if there are 100,000 people playing poker at a time (a conservative estimate, I think) at a rate of 60 hands per hour, then a couple of tables will see an event like this every single hour. If you play 10k hands per month you will see typically see something similarly improbable around every three years.

Talk about stating the obvious.

Seriously how much do you get for being a shill, I could use the extra cash myself. How do you apply etc. Im 100% serious.

About £250 a day.

If you have a maths PhD you stand a good chance of being accepted.

You'll need to get a licence from the KGC first, though and you'll need to invest £750 of your own money on the shilling course as there is no on the job training.

Apply in writing to:

Rigging and Shilling Department
Pokerstars Ltd
27 Rigtard Way
IOM


Good luck.

I want to be a shill too. So I can get paid for stating the obvious too. Like I already do.

EDIT: Thanks for the info qpw!

SooperFish, if it were obvious to you you would not be an idiot rigtard but would use your energy to learn more about and make money at POKER.

As it is you waste time and effort and, potentially, money hanging around here getting your panties in a bunch worrying about sites being rigged.

Yeah, how crazy that 3 70/30s would go to the hand with 30%. You're also conveniently leaving out the 82 vs JT hand, which was also a 70/30 but the 70% held up.
wat

Can you substitute common sense for a math PhD? I would think it would work in this particular case.