So you are going to pass up the opportunity to make me look bad by posting your theory in the probability forum? That is the main reason you are choosing not to post there?

You expect that to be believed? Tell you what, other riggies would be thrilled to make me look bad, so why don't you give them permission to post your theories in the probability forum to do just that. They can even add a line that says "I am posting this here to make Monteroy look bad."

You are not posting there because you know you have no idea what you are talking about, which is a good fit in this thread, but will get unemotionally torn apart in that forum.


Still, if this helps, you have my permission to make me look bad by posting your theories in the probability forum.

Post that as well if you like in the probability forum as I can live with the damage to my feelings.

All the best.

So your theory is the most obviously caught theory ever? Obviously this would be the method they'd use, the problem is that any percentage big enough to make them extra money is big enough to be easily spotted, and any percentage low enough to be undetected is too low to make them money, thus pointless.

Essentially the rigging you're describing is just them ****ing around with hands for the sake of ****ing around with hands, and nothing else.

Such a pathetic attempt by the shills,(notice they brought in the big guns for this), to try and dismiss the way these sites manipulate the deal is hilarious.
Monteroy trying to get the thread moved! Classic!
But this response above is really unbelievable.
Like ive said before, give it up site promoters while youre behind! It can get a lot worse.

So now i cant wait to hear your reasoning why 3 royals in a row is not rigging....Keep the post s coming shills ...You are the greatest!....Thanks for the entertainment

We had a whole discussion about it. Search the thread.

This is ONE thing arouet is right about. 3 royals do not prove rigging. There was a REASON for this happening, but it doesnt PROVE manipualtion.
14cobster's examples are proof. His posts get to the heart of OLP manipulation.
Anybody who plays can relate to what is said.

3 royals in a row would definitely make me curious (though again it would be the dumbest rig ever). One of the other riggies posted 2 royals in a row, not 3, so not sure why you guys are talking 3 in a row as if someone posted that.

Anyway, one riggie said the 2 royals in a row was not proof earlier today and another riggie said it was proof (after he posted them), so you can break the tie between the riggies if you like now that you have the right number of royals.

Since you and all the other riggies refuse to post a single specific rigging theory out of fear of being specific, at least you can do is break the stalemate between riggies on this trivial topic for them. Yes or no - 2 royals in a row is proof of a rig?

Ooops - my fault - should have said 2!

nope only here once a week now(Entertainment)...However not to start a long drawn out argument again...but the shills keep saying you need alot of hands (to prove its not varience) hmmmm ....Wouldnt it be pretty easy to screw somebody over alot in small sample then allow some normal play over a larger sample to even out the bad beat varience...Im just saying in a kinda Riggy defence?

JJJ you can start out by OPRing my 2p2 sn...

Cute theory for a home game - tricky to pull off on a large scale on a huge network.

Most riggie theories are "The site screws me" variants (generally for under $5), and how many people would be needed to ensure all of these riggies are being screwed out of their milk money?


Take your theory and make it 25,000 somebodies and try to figure out how it will work and never be caught (either by statistical analysis or an insider revealing the information).

If you are here for recreation do the following: wait a week or so and then declare you actually have done a lot more research, read other threads and forums and realize the game itself is not rigged and you were blaming that because you were not winning, but once you started working on your game it all fell into place.

Shills will applaud you, riggies will deride you (even though I suggested this in advance - don't worry they will react as they always do). After a bit of that do a reveal that you are still a riggie and then the riggies will love you again for messing with the shills and the shills will ask for proof.


I have tried to get other riggies to do this for fun, but many are so dogmatic about their faith that they cannot do it. Perhaps you can.

All the best.

OMG Hilarious

I'm one of the "big guns"?

**** yeah, Seaking.

Also im not a shill for any site. I liked stars but was never on its nuts and i cant stand merge. My only stance on this issue is that the vast majority of rigtards are losing poker players live or online. I really dont even give a f**k if its rigged for action or for certain players as long as most players are bad enough for the games to be profitable. I only entered the thread because i literally couldnt believe how stupid some of the rigtard posts were and are. I personally wish someone could somehow convince all riggies that the sites arent rigged and hopefully they would actually play online poker which would be very +ev for the rest of us.

So you make around $7000 over a 4 year period, have an average buy in of $3.21 but you are making a living off of poker? You would actually be better off applying for the fry guy position.


20-Sep-2008



$ 200 No Limit Hold'em - Six Handed
2008 Mid-America Poker Classic, Tunica

6th

$ 1,154



03-Jul-2008



$ 10,000 World Championship No Limit Hold'em
39th World Series of Poker (WSOP) 2008, Las Vegas

619th

$ 21,230

Werent we talking bout ONLINE sns??
Who gives a fk if you mincashed in the ME? The 200 mtt is just fkn hilarious to include and if its youre 2nd biggest cash ever what a fkn joke. Ive shipped local mtts arount here for over 1k 4 times in under 100$ buyins. I am self taught and shipped a $27 mtt on stars this year for a couple grand after working my way up from the micros after a couple years.Post black friday i have an $11 abi with a 60%+ roi. I specifically asked for online sn. Both mine have been made readily available. Btw is any rigtard under 30?

Do the sites you play on know you are underage?

I'm a pea-shooter.

Do you have any evidence he's under age?

I am a recreational player as i have a good job and a life.
I am not a losing player live or online.
I have played about 10k of hands of cash and about 40 trnys since the start
of the year as this is all my time allows.
Wake up enter reailty stop smoking the dope and face the real world as you are deluded.

This is an interesting quote because in many ways it shows how the poker industry differs from just about any other industry.

You admit to being recreational (which is fine) and indeed your volume in half a year is considerably less than regular players play in a week.

Essentially you are the equivalent of a guy who golfs one or two times a year or from an artistic perspective visits a gallery once a year, yet you and other equivalent riggies feel you have the knowledge and experience to make a detailed analysis of this industry despite having at best a passing and casual interaction with it.

If a guy who casually golfs twice a year made detailed comments at the club about people's swings and the course layouts and the evils of the golf industry he would be laughed at by those who have experience in the industry (for good reason). Similarly a person who visits a gallery one time a year as his only art experience yet makes detailed comments about the industry, the artists etc. would be dismissed by those who are in the industry full time.

Somehow, poker has created an activity where the casual player feels they are actually an expert about it in some capacity, I guess a variation of the Moneymaker effect. The plus side from the poker economy perspective is that these casual players keep playing in the false belief they can succeed at the activity. Contrast that to casual golfers who know they will never beat a pro (and if that was their goal they would quit).


Reality is that nearly every riggie and frankly many of the shills have no idea what they are talking about because they have no relevant experience in the industry. Fortunately they all get contained here where they do no real damage and amuse each other.


To conclude - I want to thank donks like you who feel they know what they are talking about and believe the rest of us are deluded. While know-it-alls who know nothing create an eye rolling reaction, I do appreciate that you represent much of my competition (both at the tables and in the poker business), and needless to say I have no issues with that situation.

All the best.

THE REPTILIAN AGENDA UNVEILED!

Interesting post monteroy but when does volume indicate skill level?.
Could i play poker 8 hrs a day and win a fair clip without doubt.
Would i like to do this,not particularly i enjoy my work and it pays well,
sitting grinding for days on end would drive me insane.
I have played poker and studied game theory on and off for meny a year as i do find the
math aspect intersting also the critical thinking and meny other aspects of this game.
I do not claim to be an expert and as you have said the RNG is the least of your problems compared to all the other shady practise that goes on online.

I agree with some parts of your post and others parts i disagree.
BTW very few players will ever succeed at this online game to certain degree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect

So what is the criteria thats makes one an expert in poker.
What are the parameters?If i am correct in the past coaches here have been found out to be frauds.