That's the fundamental problem with a lot (though by no means all) of the 'tards and riggies.

They are basically such dishonest douchebags that not only would they steal the million under such circumstances, they actually believe that attitude is normal.

They cannot conceive of anyone not doing it. So obviously they cannot comprehend anyone running an honest game.

You have the sense that is common to degenerate thieves. Nothing to crow about.

Wow!

A sensible, logical, post from Fated.

He's quite correct. A lot of people think the amount of rake the sites take is unfair but they will continue to use them - sometimes in preference to other sites with lower rake - if they can make money there.

Many of the riggies here, while misguided, at least are interested in some kind of dialogue. You are nothing but a useless troll, spewing out the same nonsense again and again and again and again. If I were to suspect anyone here to be a shill for the sites, it would be the posters like you who make posts in support of the riggie line of thinking that are so inane as to make the idea seem preposterous and lose all credibility.

Im not really clear on how you feel about thetruth5 and his posts

Reading between the lines, I think he feels that many of the riggies here, while misguided, at least are interested in some kind of dialogue. TT5, however is nothing but a useless troll, spewing out the same nonsense again and again and again and again. If he were to suspect anyone here to be a shill for the sites, it would be the posters like him who make posts in support of the riggie line of thinking that are so inane as to make the idea seem preposterous and lose all credibility.

But that's just a shot in the dark.

As long as he's going to keep spewing the same tripe over and over again, he's going to get the same reply from me. Well, I guess if we get complaints from others, I might stop.

But, as far as I can see, it's true. All he can say is that, not that he suspects some sites might be rigged, not that he knows some sites are rigged, but that he knows that all sites are rigged. Yet he won't explain how he knows. He believes that most of the Youtube rigged videos are legit, but he won't provide a link to even one that he's prepared to stand behind. He has no interest in any real discussion. He's just here to tell everyone that all online poker is rigged, and anyone who has the temerity to not take him at his word is a "dreamer", a "site promoter", a "jerk", "ignorant", or whatever other insult he decides to pull out.

So, he is nothing but a troll. Until he changes his ways, or either I or a few of you fail to be amused by it, he'll keep getting the same reply from me.

I'm based in the UK and play on a site hosted by a major high street bookies (betting shop)
Whilst the UK has a fairly librel view of gambling, the providers are heavily regulated.
To suggest a company of this size would risk losing it's sports betting privledges by being associated with a crooked poker game is bearing on ridiculous.
Only about 5% of there revenues come from poker but obviously they will risk 95% of their income to scratch an extra bit of rake from the poker players.
Their poker is a skin on a network so unless there is a "it's a UK bookie unrigged RNG" running and another for other regions, I'm happy to accept it's not rigged until proven otherwise.

I'm still amused by it. But maybe to keep if fresh you should mix it up a bit - like translate into different languages, or binary or hex. OR we could turn it into a game - each time you could change 1 word in it and the first person to spot it gets MASSIVE bragging rights (maybe even a custom undertitle?). I mean, gotta keep the fans interested or you'll lose them, right?

I love this idea!

Maybe one day may go by where you don't post in this thread or at least post something of interest, or a post that isn't belittling someone. Snarky? C'mon you just made that word up! Maybe you should open yet another account and you could start a fresh 1000+ posts in this thread.

See, this is the problem with you ******s.

You make stupid statements implying inaccurate facts which can be easily checked. There have been many days when I haven't posted in this thread.

Lot's of those too.

Of course they are a lot harder when you post.

ROFLMAO.

Of course.

And using my God like powers I instantly arranged for it to get over two million Google hits and appear in dictionaries, some of the entries in which go back over 100 years.

Are you sure you should be messing with me?

Maybe.

And maybe you should learn to deal with facts rather than just acting like a spoiled kid throwing false accusations around.

Wait, what?

BTW, you don't, perhaps, think the following is somewhat belittling?

You're doing a good impression of a pot casting aspersions about the state of the kettle.

At what point do "the fish" get the tables turned on them? Here's what I don't get about the belief that internet poker is rigged from an ownership point of view - they already have the rake to give the millions of "free" dollars each year. Thy could care less who plays and what the skill level is. Each hand returns money to the owners. They care about traffic.

As players, we should be more concerned about collusion and multi-account users than anything else, but instead, you will get long, misguided rants about stealing and rigging the game at an institutional level.

Here's why i don't think internet poker is rigged - I have about the same win rate online as in a B&M. I am a winning player. I have been playing several years. So if the hypothesis held true that internet poker was rigged, wouldn't I have profited early on as "a fish" and then seen my luck and the cards go bad, robbing me of my winnings? I mean, I'm not a pro - just some Joe Schmo - isn't that who supposedly gets robbed blind.

Nobody ever answers that point. Because i don't think they can. It would be very, very difficult to program intentional losses for players while still adhering to random card generation and deciding which players get crapped on and which are "allowed" to win. Either i'm lucky and have slipped through the cracks, or a lot of people are full of crap. I'll choose the latter.

If you are convinced that all online poker sites are rigged, I have a suggestion for you. Try playing at some of the smaller sites. In time, if your experience is like mine has been, you will notice a big difference. From what I’ve seen, the big sties are following the P.T. Barnum business model: there’s a sucker born every minute. They can afford to lose your business because there are plenty more just like you coming down the pike. So they don’t seem too concerned about allegations of rigged software – although they are obviously doing all they can to defend their sites by employing numerous people to speak on their behalf in online poker forums. (We know this is happening because, amazingly enough, some of the “shills” have actually admitted it right here in these forums.)

So if, say, you keep getting knocked out of tournament after tournament when you are all in each time as a heavy favorite – and not just small bad runs of cards, like 5 or 6 times in a row, but improbably long, long bad beat runs - you really don’t have to put up with it. AND, you can still keep playing online poker.

Logic dictates that the smaller sites are far more likely to run a fair game because they really need your business. In my experience, I haven’t seen any evidence of these ENDLESS BAD-BEAT BARAGES at any of the smaller sites I’ve played on. And what if a small site starts to get big and decides to join the dark side? Well, then **** them too. There will always be other small sites out there where we can get a fair game.

Having played on not one but FOUR major, high street, UK bookies' poker sites, it is fairly apparent that the argument you have put forward is not strictly accurate.

These UK bookies have signed up to be part of poker networks, which they trust an independent company to run for them and the bookies have no real say or control, (whatever you want to call it,) over what goes on on the poker site.

It is clear when you speak to anyone at the UK bookies' sites, be it from customer service staff, up to 'poker managers' that everything that goes on on the site happens without their input and I believe in a lot of cases, without the site even being consulted or really aware of what goes on.

To take an example, iPoker have 'Rio Jackpot' tournaments, whereby if you win 6 in a row, you win a jackpot of $25,000. The jackpot used to increase by $10,000 every week. Recently I spotted the jackpot was at $50,000, which obviously wouldn't be possible with increases of $10,000 from $25,000. I worked out that iPoker had changed the set-up and were only increasing the Jackpot by $5,000 a week. I went to the websites of 2 major UK bookies who operate on iPoker and they both still claimed this Jackpot was going up by $10,000 a week. I spoke to customer service staff who told me the same. This was months after the change had been made.

This is just one example of the UK bookies having handed over complete control to these poker networks and how everything that goes on on these sites happens above their heads, so to speak. As much as these major high street UK companies you mentioned would certainly not intentionally risk their massive profits and reputations, this could be going on without them knowing about it. The independent sites they have trusted to run their poker sites for them ARE doing whatever they want without the UK sites' knowledge and this could in theory stretch to a 'rigging' of the deal.

lol.

I have personally put in about 80% of my play in the last 2 years at a smaller site.

That said, I think most reasonable people would aggree that you are at least somewhat more likely to be cheated at smaller sites than at the big two, especially in terms of in-house cheating.

All well and good but it doesn't alter the fact that:

There is no EVIDENCE that the networks in question are guilty of any malfeasance

Until there is EVIDENCE it is wrong to point the finger and make 'suggestions' that the deal may be rigged.

You might just as well come out with the statement that McDonalds Franchisees have no control over the ingredients with which Ronald is supplying them and he may be adding a slow poison the meat.

It's true but as there is the same amount of EVIDENCE that McDonalds are poisoning meat as there is that sites are rigging the RNG it would be a pretty pointless observation

I didn't think it was belittling at all as the whole Josem/Truth discussion was nothing more than humorous banter. How can you belittle someone who is not even having a serious discussion?

play more hands and look yourself it really isnt that difficult. it is all just probability, you do realize that you aren't a favorite by more than 80-20 which mean you lose 1 out of 5 times and thus 1 out of 25 times you lose 2 times in a row, it happens play more and the odds will work out over the long run.
if you cant handle that don't play

why would they cheat, they are basically printing free money

I think we would all seriously like TT5 to provide something - anything - credible to back up his wild assertions.

Well, assuming someone (Josem) is not being serious just because he's talking to an idiot (TT5) seems to be belittling his standing as a serious poster.

However, if you say you didn't intend it to be belittling I'll withdraw the accusation.

obv disagree with OP.
If there is any sort of in house cheating (even player collusion maybe) big two (PS, FT) have a lot of things to lose whereas small site relatively small too lose.

Smaller sites have much more to gain by rigging the games as they don't have the massive amount of rake generated by larger sites. This seems like a misplaced comment.

Furthermore, have you never won a decent take on a large site? Heck, I've won a few tourneys with a moderate buy-in in the $25-$50 range for a couple grand each time. Just like tourneys I've won live, i won and lost some coin flips along the way. Fortunately the ones I lost were to smaller stacks.

Was I just lucky to have avoided scammers that day, or did the software "allow" me to win thinking they'd get the money back later on a series of horrific bad beats? Just wondering, because I'm still waiting.

I can only assume the people who claimed sites are rigged have never experienced an extended downturn in luck. It happens both online and in B&M, and how one handles it and overcomes is one thing that separates good players and consistent winners, with bad players and people who continually lose money and claim "FRAUD!"

Wow, you really do like to stretch your imagination. You are obviously from the UK and therefore aware of how one misplaced comment at a dinner function took down a well known jewellery store.
You think Laddies, Will Hill, etc. Would risk being associated with anything that has the remotest possibility of causing the same "Sun" headlines for them?
The fact these companies are associated with online poker and it is not their main source of income gives me far more comfort that everything is above board than any independant review.
Your welcome to your views, I'll back business sense though.