even when the players do everything possible to lose with their AA or 53o? does the software manipulate the players' thoughts too, forcing them to make decisions in line with the site's desired outcome?
how does this apply to tournaments?
so how did you detect it?
care to share that information with us so we can see this for ourselves?

For the record, I'm not so ignorant as to think everyone must be proficient in the English language in order to post on a message board that is popular in many non-English speaking countries.

That said, your rant earlier about probability showed how little you actually know about variance over a large sample. This is a key flaw to your debate. You claim proof cannot be presented of a fair deal; whereas, I believe millions of hands analyzed that show that variance falls within the proper range over said sample is very indicative of a fair deal. At the very least it shows that more than likely it is fair. Fortunately, the laws of probability are on my side and not yours.

even this guy took the time to study data...

All you need is PokerEV, HEM, or another EV calculator to see where you're at vs. expectation.

Well, I have noticed the crusaders who try to stop having intelligent conversation about seemingly rigged poker sites having very little ability to apply basic formal logic to the problem. Yesterday I tried to demonstrate that applying basic logic and a small element of set theory makes completely useless your 24/7 shouting about the multimillion hand sample analysis. Right know I would like to suggest to go back to basics. Here is a simple formal logic formula.

Statement “A”: Poker sites operators states that will deliver a fair, randomly distributed game to players and promises an uncompromised software operation and system integrity, and its operation will comply with enforced policies

Statement “B”: If the poker site operator intentionally fails to demonstrate that their system is integrity is not compromised by malicious components, if the the policies are not enforced on their system, if the poker sites continuously refuse to provide evidences that their system is fully audited, if the servers including business continuity servers at any location are not under the full control of the gaming authority the operation cannot be seen as fair, it must seen as a manipulated system, it is dishonest and unfair, in plain English is rigged

A = TRUE
B = TRUE
therefore PS and FT is rigged

Now, please go run, and do the google about formal logic than bring your usual personal rants.

I just went over the very simple, basic logic of why YOU are the crusader but apparently that's beyond your grasp.

Also, when were you planning on starting some intelligent discussion?

1. No, what I´m saying is that IF a hand goes to the showdown it will win less frequently than expected.

2. This model dont apply to tournaments.

3. I didnt detect, Im proposing a model of manipulation that would be lucratove for the site and hard to be detected, and propably cheap.

4. ?????

With these software for sure you can make statistical analisys but what I noted in the post is that the ablity to make satatistical analisys is worthless if you dont know:

1. Which hands to look for manipulation

2. In wich point of the round to look for the manipulation.

3. In which point of time to look for the manipulation .

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Your logical fallacy is laughable.

So you have no evidence, but you just think this "could" work and therefore must be happening?

this is all about the same thing as saying "I'm not sure that UFO's exist, but here's how they'd probably operate if they did." Nice work, Dr. Dummy. Shall I share my theories on how sex with your wife would go if we had an affair?

Let's get some real debate started...

I Can't Believe Y'all Watch Fake-Ass Wrestling

I dont think it must be happening, but taking into account everything PokerErasmus said about policies etc. I have to think that is more probable that it IS happening than not. Simply because if you can win 2x dollars in a year why would poker companies want to win just x dollars/year?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQCU3...eature=related

No is not the same thing because UFO were never proved to exist but manipulated sofware are a part of our daily lives. It happens with banks, with email, with security softwares. Manipulated softwares used by malicious companies is not a never proved to exist thing as UFO. So dont try to confuse minds.

Perhaps you can clarify what exactly PokerErasmus is saying about "policies".

You believe because you are enough arrogant to ignore my rational and logically valid arguments that I presented yesterday, including why the nature of the domain (i.e. in the context of poker any hands is valid and must seen as random) makes irrelevant the multimillion hand analysis if the site distribute winning hands to designated accounts, as any hands perfectly fits into the domain and well within the boundaries of the domain.

Additionally, you are enough intellectually blind to ignore the fact, that their IT infrastructure has never been adequatelly audited, the policies are not enforced, the operation is not opened to public scrutiny, the infrastructure is based outside of the control of auhtorities, therefore these Russian maffia backed Israelis operates a way that is unimaginable in other fields of our civilization such as in financial, transportation or health systems.

Sorry ... I forgot, you don't care about regulations, IT security and system integrity - you have your large sample ... (the sample that relevance anyway is zero if the sites really manipulates the card distribution as the manipulated cards perfectly fits into any samples just like the not manipulated cards do).

Ah, now this is the good stuff, pure riggedology in all of it's glory.

Keep in mind that the tenants of the riggedology faith require the following:

- Vague statements

- Assumptions in the place of facts

- Disproval of assumptions required

The beauty of riggedology is it sets impossible conditions. You must disprove assumptions that are not based on anything but creative thought.


In the above example B:

- Sites must prove they are not rigging based on undefined conditions (try to decode any specific conditions in his part B).

- If somehow the conditions are met then newer vague ones will be put in place that cannot be met.

- Once the site does not disprove rigging based on these random, undefined conditions set forth, the next step is to translate that into an assumption of "they are clearly hiding something"


It is the basic form of "logic" of a riggedologist (and any conspiracy addict). Instead of working through the logic of a process, they set an end goal (in this case OMG RIGGZORS) and create in their mind logical steps to get to that goal.

I ate a sandwich. Sandwiches are made out of bread. Bread is another name for money. Thus, I like eating money.

Actual facts will not work as a counter to this approach as they will merely switch the conditions and toss in personal insults (ie: you guys are too stupid and naive to see the real truth) to keep the riggedology practice going at full speed.

Those of you trying to counter with logic and requests of proof are on a never ending mission. Just sit back and enjoy the riggedologists, especially the really dedicated ones. Admire the beauty of their artistry (blame the Russians etc).

Manipulated software in the way you have suggested is not part of our daily lives. Give me one example. Also, UFO's do exist, they just are usually planes or helicopters, but to the viewer they can be UFO's. A parallel can be made here in regards to your theories.

why would your grocery store want to give you 1.0 pound of steak when they could really give you .95 for the same price?

why wouldn't your bank actually give you 2.99% interest on your savings while saying you get 3%? heck, they probably charge you 8.01% interest on your mortgage but tell you it's 8% too!

why would your daughter give you all her money from walking the streets when she could squirrel away a few bucks for herself?

I guess you just can't trust anybody these days.

If you think every business entity is out to screw you, why would ya even consider putting money into any of them?

I don't know anything about you either, and I have not had an independent audit done of your character. Is it alright if I believe that you beat your wife? Your logic fails.

EDIT: The part I put in bold is false. You are thinking about probability in the short term, but not over a large sample. Sure you could get pocket Aces a number of times in a row and as an isolated incident would never be able to prove any sort of "rigged deal", but if over a million hands you got dealt pocket aces 50,000 times this would clearly indicate a non-random deal. Fortunately, no studies have ever shown the deal to fall outside of the proper possible variance.

I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

great, now ZOG is in on it too. I'm definitely gonna introduce some Turner Diary-esque rhetoric into my Wrestling diatribe now.

this is not leveled 3 vs 2. Marcus, step aside and make sure everyone plays by the rules.

I think you are laughable with your useless large samples, in which perfectly fits any manipulated hands just like fits any not manipulated hands, therefore you are terrible missing the point with yoor so called analysis. You are useless.

Anyway, between two laugh and your meaningless multimillion nonse analysis, please disprove my logical formula, I will be happy to admit that I made a mistake.

And then please explain how the unregulated, intentinally not audited operation that is outside of the control of the authority can be manifested in a fair game.

[[ As for mentioning my wife, thanks for asking but she is all right. I don't think you hand analysator freak of nature will ever know what is having relation to a woman, anyawy it was good talking to you :-)) ]]

see, here's where they're devious...

you will get AA the proper number of hands, but IF you get to showdown, you'll win less often than expected. because it's nearly impossible to determine the exact number of times you're supposed to win AT SHOWDOWN in multi-way pots, when the fish gets his miracle river card you'll just say "that's poker." meanwhile, the site allows him to play a little longer, laughing all the way to the unregulated offshore bank.

do I have that right?

oh, not quite. that only applies to cash games. there's a totally different theory on how they rig them. ask sooper for a briefing on that.