Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiki
If people were getting these unfeasible long strings of bad beats then a good number of them would have analysed their hand histories and presented the evidence here.
The fact that no one has done that is a pretty good indication that there is very probably nothing wrong with the deal and the steady stream of whiners coming here with their gallimaufry of weird theories are nothing more than poor poker players who cannot correctly calculate odds and do not know what a confidence interval is.
people present evidence then you answer with below quote
do you really think that is the only one they have or only few that they have???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiki
Oh, what a surprise!
Yet another poster who believes that a single hand history, evidence of rigging doest provide.
then why are you keep asking for example?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiki
Surprise, surprise.
Except that, were it being rigged, it would be absurdly easy to provide evidence.
No evidence has been forthcoming.
Therefore we default to the logical stance: Probably not rigged.
how absurdly easy
if so, then you can provide evidence of your own that why poker is not rigged.
rigtard can't provide evidence that poker is rigged cannot be use as evident that poker is not rigged.
100% of rigtard is not qualify nor have the software to do this "absurdly easy" tast.
i find you and monteroy is very out of line
people kind here because they have doubt
instead of assisting them on how to analysis that show all numbers are inline or not inline.
you two choose to do the following
1. asking what you know is not possible for anybody to do.
if this is not true, then proof of poker is not rigged would have showup by now.
2. misleading/derailing
-telling people to search for proof that online poker is not rigged when it doesn't exist.
-telling people that hem/pt3 can do the task, 1k-10k hand. with assisstance of pen and paper, yes. but you want sample size that is in millions hands. which is not possible with hem/pt3+ pen and paper.
-telling people that people COULD check and provide evidence if it's rigged.
this is not true, people does not have the ability to check.
-telling people that spadit's work proof it.
this is not true, it's not and it's not even finish.
let's just use AP superuser example.
most the good players that feel something is wrong didn't do much.
some keep quiet
some put it in their personal blog
some post on 2p2 which get laugh at
this is evidence that "people does not have ability to check anything about online poker rng"
no disrespect to josem
his work came after main piece of the evidence* is out.
even with josem's impressive work, without the main piece of evidence*, his work will not be enough to convince 2p2 that there is superuser.
note
* full MTT HH with all players hole card expose are release by AP support by accident.