most extensive 'online pokerz is rigged imo' OP ever?

I'll be honest.

I didn't read. But maybe you're onto something.

Maybe you're not.

Bad idea!!!!!! This thread serves as a dumping ground for people who want to start threads about rig claims. As such it disallows such claims from littering the entire forum. It essentially eliminates the threads you supposedly despise. Furthermore, changing the name to something as insulting as you say is also a bad idea. "The great 'Poker is rigged' debate carries enough light humor and irony to keep normal people satisfied. Your heroic recommendations should be bumped to another thread, a containment thread just for yourself! People have been had containment threads dedicated to them and it ain't the most desireable thing.

A real programmer would know this evaluation throws a division by zero exception.

oh, and lol @ editing out 80% of the OP

Seriously. How are you going to jump onto the "shill" bandwagon and then try to topple the wagon? If you find pleasure in dishing insults, I guess as I apparently do, shame shame, then why don't you just rejoice in finding your new home.

No I don't agree. There is no statistical validity to say that because 2500 all-ins is hard work that makes it "enough". Sometimes gathering enough trials is hard, sometimes it is impossible. Just pretending something is "enough" because it was hard has no validity. It simply means you have a very hard to obtain sample which is still too small. The bolded part makes me wonder how good of a Statistician you will end up being. A statistician would not only accept criticism for too small of a sample but wouldn't even attempt to defend a sample with no validity.

If it is too hard (more like too tedious) to modify the hands then maybe you should write some software to modify the hands so it doesn't have to be done manually? Computers excel at repetitive, tedious tasks.

If you really wanted to prove it:
Find 9 other people who believe it is rigged. Then all 10 of your play at the same SNG 200 times. Have some of players (maybe 3 of the 9) play like Fish. Agree ahead of time to use p2p transfers so each player gets back their buyins. (Alternatively you could just pay for losses of the 3 players acting the Fish and have all other winning stand. Collect all 10 hand histories for all 10 players. Write a program to merge the hand histories so that it has access to all hole cards and then you can check for anomalies other than just all-ins.

If that is too much work then just accept you have an unproven suspicion and don't want to invest the amount of time, resources, and money to prove it..

PS: it looks like most of your links are bad.

Let's just cut out the irrelevant stuff and then we can see what evidence was presented:
Cool, thanks for that OP

Juk

Not if I play cash games too, which I did. And do u think they would use 0 in this calculation? Maybe 0,01 or?


No I think they will use 0 and throw an exception.

TY for confirming that you are not a programmer. I had my suspicions, but it's always nice to be sure.

Well, not the most desirable for them, anyway.

Where is my ***** post. Anyone that saved a screen dump?

Cruel.

Fair, but cruel!

A real programmer would assert(investment != 0); before calculating ROI.

A real programmer would not be using Java.

anyone that has my original post, it magically disappeared and I have only a half made copy

QFT!

Last edited by Boost2Boob; Today at 09:40 AM.

Most "facts" and "sure things" speak for themselves.

One thing thats for sure is the simple fact you use these phrases is an indication you are talking nonsense.

a real programmer would have saved his work.....

I will tell a little about me. I started playing hold em about five years ago and I only played on B2B (Entraction). My first 100 euro deposited went fast to 50 (bad play) and then I moved down in stakes and tried to learn the game. Now I have winnings of 10k+ euros so I am not a complete fish.

I am educated in statistics at the university (30 points, 40 points full year) and am a certified Java programmer. I can also program in other languages. Have a one year programming course and 20 points computer science). These are not my main subjects, but wanted to let u know that I have some knowledge in this area.

At the time I started playing at 24hpoker they had a lot of freerolls with good value so that was also a way to build a roll. After my first 50 euro loss I played small stakes for a long time and I only played cash games and freerolls.

My first account was T on 24hpoker. Since I didn't get any rake back I moved to 10bet. I was also sick of the "bad luck" and wanted to see if an account change would be different. There I created the account B and they had nice rake back. 10Bet also had a lot of freerolls with very good value. After that I created the account S. With all these three accounts I made money through freerolls. I also created the account D on Martinspoker.

With all these four accounts I played a lot of freerolls and occasionally cash games so I guess my ROI was very high on these accounts.

When I had played more than one year on account T I started to be suspicious since I thought the underdog won "too many times". I called it the "small stack rig", but it is probably a fish helping rig. Help the small stack so the game continues, help the fish so the game continues. It is nearly the same idea.

I didn't know how to check it out, since I had no knowledge about poker tracking software etc. When I had too much bad luck on all of these accounts I started writing about this in a swedish pokerforum, where nearly all called me a moron. There were representatives from sites "proving" it wasn't rigged, a few agreed with me and most did not.

I came across PokerEV (thanks Phil) and decided to do an investigation that didn't cost too much in risking money but was played by somewhat thinking poker players. So I decided to play 3 euro sit'n'gos and calculate allins before river. U have to manually edit the hand history, else poker tracker thinks it is play money.

I played with five accounts, but mainly I used three. I had S on PointPoker, didn't use this so much since I lost my money. I had B on Betsson, no rake back so I didnt use this either. Although I love Betsson I love rake back more. D on 24hpoker, which was D on Martinspoker before. D on Pinnacle with nice rake back the next day. and J on CardGrinders.

OK, I mainly played with three accounts. D, which I had and played a lot of freerolls with, D which I also played a lot of freerolls with and J which I didn't play any freerolls with.

In the beginning I played mostly with account J and to my surprise the allin luck was "normal". For u who know about PokerEV the luck was about 50 % which meant that u "got what u deserved". Had I been wrong all the time. Was my "bad luck" just a coincidence?

I also played with the other accounts and there it was impossible to win in "luck situations" (allin before river). I have continued to play sit'n'gos for about two years now and nothing has changed. Some accounts (the high ROI freeroll accounts have bad luck) and the no freeroll account has normal allin luck.

Here are graphs of all the accounts. Don't mind the sums, some are small and some are high. Focus on the percentage of the allin luck and the relation of the Sklansky bucks curve and the actual winnings curve.


First account T cashgames and freerolls.

http://imageshack.us/f/18/tompa.jpg

and the normal distribution (P=19,6%)

http://imageshack.us/f/818/tompanormal.jpg

These graphs show that I was right in my suspicion that I had been unlucky, although the bad luck wasn't extreme.


The account B cash games and freerolls.

http://imageshack.us/f/135/boostn.jpg

and the normal distribution (P=29,7%)

http://imageshack.us/f/193/boostnormal.jpg


The account D at Martinspoker freerolls and cash games.

http://imageshack.us/f/812/martins.jpg

The normal distribution for this account. (11 %)

http://imageshack.us/f/69/martinsnormal.jpg


Another account S at this time cashgames and freerolls.

http://imageshack.us/f/200/suger.jpg

and the normal distribution. (P=2,6%)

http://imageshack.us/f/716/sugernormal.jpg


And the sitngos accounts

Pinny with a lot of freeroll money and therefore high ROI.

http://imageshack.us/f/31/pinny.jpg

and the normal distribution (P=1,9%)

http://imageshack.us/f/32/pinnynormal.jpg


D with a lot of freeroll money and therefore high ROI.

http://imageshack.us/f/190/damnu.jpg

and the normal distribution (P=2,2%)

http://imageshack.us/f/864/damnormal.jpg


And J on CG with no freeroll money won and woops the allin luck is normal.

http://imageshack.us/f/40/48347724.jpg

and the normal distribution(P=57,8%)

http://imageshack.us/f/834/cgnormal.jpg


And finally the five sit'n'go accounts in one graph.

http://imageshack.us/f/546/fivem.jpg

And the normal distribution.(P=1,2%)

http://imageshack.us/f/219/fivenormal.jpg


One way to check my results would be to invite a third party to play with two of my accounts and see if the "bad luck" continues. That would be really interesting.

(This is not the original post. I have done my best to restore the post as it originally was).

Why does the ***** software change my .jpg links to a bunch of stars all the time?

Sounds like the beginnings of a new AP/UB sized scandal.

Perhaps we should move this thread under the umbrella.

Of course u are right. I am just so fed up of people that complain while they do nothing, when I have spent hundreds of hours to try to find out the truth.


That something is boring and tedious is not the same as it is valid.

Wow. Really?