Yes, mankind as a whole needs to take a step forward and rely less on evidence and more on unsubstantiated paranoia. Screw evidence! Mind patterns for the win!

Actually, a bit of paranoia is not a bad thing as it can help keep systems in check. Overall though most systems (whether business, social, political etc) weed out or ignore most of the extreme paranoia for efficiency purposes. Trying to satisfy every person's odd beliefs will just cripple any system or network.

Once in a while a whole system can move in a bad direction based on fear and paranoia but usually it recovers from that once the situation is analyzed and understood.

Outlying individuals with paranoid beliefs in and by themselves rarely matter to a system other then if they happen upon some thoughts that could lead to a better improvement in the system.

I am not talking about silliness like my AK always loses to KQ, but basic concern about for instance collusion has led most of the sites to put in automated methods to detect this type of play. Fear of being cheated requires companies to allay that fear with good security, thus paranoia (albeit in a gentle form) does serve a purpose.

Unsubstantiated paranoia does no one any good. We can detect possible collusion by simply seeing one hand, whereas you cannot detect "riggedness" using just your memory. Fear of collusion is often substantiated and has led to security measures.

My response was to Soopers' rejection of the concept that evidence is important aspect of a debate. Unsubstantiated fear is not.

As I said, the extreme fears of the individual themselves do not matter for the system to work. I have no doubt that Stars gets a ton of emails yelling at them about their play money tables being rigged. Those people's fears will never be satisfied.

However, the nature of the human condition is to be suspicious of things at times, and certainly many apply to the relatively new online world. Issues like security (against cheaters and of the balances themselves) are not crazed "my AA got cracked, the world hates me" beliefs.

These are genuine concerns of the customers and a smart company will spend the time and money to help alleviate those concerns. The Stars secure token thing is another new example of how it is helping it's customers worried about their accounts being secure.

On more specific things like collusion, indeed the fear is often substantiated. I caught a couple on Stars once, reported it and Stars took appropriate action. However, most times the person who lost just lost and nothing more. They have to be comforted that the site is doing the proper measures to ensure the games are secure.

Most understand that and accept that when it is explained and that is why the system works. The extreme fanatics do not matter in that regard.



He is an extremist in his views and as a rule evidence is not really on top of the to do list of any extremist. You can ask him for evidence all day long and it will do you no good, that is not what his beliefs are based on.

All I tried to do was show him that there are people with his exact same beliefs except for the opposite side (ie: small stacks win too much) and I also suggested that while he is free to create any beliefs he likes, he should at least make the effort to have them match the simplest ways people can check them.

I will never ask him to prove his theories or provide evidence since that is not how his mind works. He knows what he says is true because he knows what he says is true because he believes what he says is true.

Go to an abortion rally and you can see people on both sides of the issue demonstrate the exact same behavior like this, only with opposite views on their issue.

You are wasting your time trying to go about the "provide logic and evidence" approach as that will never go anywhere. Still, it is your time to do with as you like, so good luck on the quest.

based on your recent statement of hypothesis, I've got a couple of questions regarding this post, sir.

1) Why were you "just" playing online poker if you believe it is not a fair game?

2) You specifically had mentioned "rigging" at lower levels to benefit fish. Isn't playing a game which you believe is manipulated to help poor players equivalent to knowingly participating in this practice?

This is sad...
basically took my questions to him and just said the same thing to KoF - even after he said he doesn't play online poker, thus really having no reason to participate in this "debate" for any reason besides trolling.

Why not find a quilting forum and tell the regulars there your thoughts on another activity you don't indulge in? Oh, wait - 'cause you don't have any grudges against any quilters, do you?
this statement is pretty worthless because you have not established in any way that YOU have a clue. In fact, your petty insults, constant side-stepping of direct questions and insistence that "average players" don't have the ability to detect these patterns - when in fact you haven't either - pretty much shows you as someone devoid of clues.

Also, I think it's fairly safe to say that there are more extraordinary poker players on 2+2 than anywhere else, so if someone can find this evidence, it would be a member of this forum.
Do you have evidence about the size of his ass? Because if you don't, you shouldn't bring it up. If you do, well, that's kinda gay.

I couldnt resist xD he is just so .. xD ahm .. Cute.

must be his ass then.

well, maybe you are gay if you want an evidence about his ass ? Becouse now as i read it, i see it as a simple metafore, and i told that becouse he said something like "we need ..." refering to more than one person, when i was talking to him and to him only. So, this kind of proves that his asz= my 4 aszes (omg)

here we go again .. i thout it was "Poker is rigged debate" and not someone said that he has fat ass and i need a prove debate . I am not a gay if was thinking about asking my number.

I don't want evidence about his ass, just for people to stop making wacky claims and then being upset they aren't accepted as fact.

OK FACT : I dont know if his ass is fat, and i dont have any mathematical prove for it. Happy now ?

Thrilled. You might even say "gay."

Do you have any evidence of me being gay before making such statment ? :-) Just kidding, have a break.

no debates ? Ur not fun.

You don't even realize what a horrible example that is. Your opponent is going to win almost a third of the time in that scenario. He's 30% if he's suited (which will usually be the case if he's calling you with Ax). So he wins 30% in live games too. So you should "get anxious and expect it" in live play too, and it happens often enough that our selective memory is going to make it seem like it happens a majority of the time. Your personal cognitive bias towards rigged online play is clearly shown by this example.

Why am I still posting in this thread?

how does this look, buddy?

That looks SOOPER!

I haven't had some really good fish in a really long time.

I want a piece of that !

Anyone who has played Party Poker for a considerable amount of time will know what I'm saying here.

Party Poker's engine fixes the outcome of cards in cash games to benefit the company in two ways:

- Generates more rake ("action flops" inducing more interest in hands)

- Keeps more people playing (and more rake donated) by levelling the playing field. Rewarding bad play/players with "Miracle" flop/turn/river cards time and time again, against the overarching odds, keeping their bankroll intact.

If the turn of the card was absolutely random then there'd be a lot less players and a lot less fish. The site would be busto.

The turn of a card is ultimately not random, or even realistically simulated random.

I'm not going to go into it in more detail than that. Any regular who isn't kidding himself can back me up here, or leave it. I've played on the site for over 4 years now, and for a considerable amount of that time it's been my only source of income (0.25/0.50 right up to 10/20). I'm going to continue playing Party Poker as I have done since I was 18 because I'm familiar with how the software (albeit corrupt) works, and because the competition is still shockingly poor.

Cheers

**** off moran

Join Date: Dec 2005


huh

I guess you have enough hand historys in a past 4 years to run an analyzis on the turn card. Someone m8 help you.

You mean looking for...........................please excuse the swear word in this thread............................evidence.

Somehow I don't think he will return with that.