so what you are saying is you cant figure out why your winrate went down instead of going negative if players got better? please tell me this is a joke... if its not... maybe poker isnt for you

you experienced that when you lost less pots you won more money and when you lost more pots you lost more money? again... truly a brilliant observation

The exact same reason the DoNs I did for a year long semi-grind saw my 15-17% ROI (over several thousand games) drop to around 10% before they removed the games.

I was actually playing better poker than ever in those games, but many of the regs became much better and my edge over them dropped (in some cases to zero). The weaker regs (like Rolltideroll) who used to win at 10-15% when the games were easier were now breaking even and yelling over and over how rigged they were and how everyone was cheating them.

He did not realize that he had become basically a donk in the games. A simple stat I used was open sb raise on bb at certain points in the DoNs with 6 people left. The better regs had nearly a 90% raise figure while the weaker regs number was often times 10-30% because they were still playing like the games were a year earlier (trying to fold their way into the money).

With 3-4 regs becoming much better and some of the weaker regs quitting, the games were still beatable but they became tougher. Essentially they evolved.

I quit those games (as a grind) months before they ended partially because I could not get the other regs to play above the $20 buy ins, and the coaching/staking business took up a lot of my time, but I would not have been surprised if my ROI had dropped to 5-7% by the time those games were ending, and that is with a relatively low rake structure (4%).


Do I know you specifically as a person/player? Nope, but I have seen hundreds of variations of guys exactly like you both at the tables and applying for a stake/coaching, and I know that one of the signs of a player that is unstakeable is one that is genuinely paranoid about huge conspiracies with themselves as the main character in that story.

Know why guys like you frustrate me legitimately (as opposed to the standard riggies and shills here). You frustrate me because you likely have a lot of potential if you could ever get snapped out of this paranoid trap you are encasing yourself within. It's almost as if you do not want to make money and you would rather live in misery moaning about the world is rigged.

I will listen to some moody 90s music if I am in the mood for that.



AP with their frequent reload bonuses and rakeback created a lot of rakeback regs that were never really that great at the games. As those benefits slowly diminished the players had to get a bit better or else they would start losing.

You likely received quite a bit more in rakeback on average in 2007 per hand played than 2009 as AP and other rooms scaled back on bonuses and changed their terms on how rakeback was handled. I did not play on AP since 2004 or so, so I would not know all the details on that network.




Ever watch the show DOg Whisperer where the guy pokes the dogs and goes tzzzzt! to snap them out of whatever weird mental state they are in.

That's what you need whenever you start drifting your brain toward thoughts like this.



The games changed in a slow way over time. The industry changed over time as well. ALl of your posts feel like I am talking to a guy still living in 2007.

Tzzzzt!!!




Tzzzzt!!!



If my tzzzzting does not work then all I can suggest is you read all of blatantriggedguy's posts because within a few months you will be a variation of him.


Good luck with whichever path you take.

Actually, Monteroy, my plan is simple. Wait until the US legalizes and regulates online poker. While the mob may have cheated the IRS and state revenue agencies when they ran Vegas, they never fooled with the state gaming commission. I was at a craps table one time in the late 1970's when a state inspector checked the dice for perfect balance which they did. No site licensed by a US state gaming commission will get away with any rigging of its deal and all the sites will have to provide audits of both software and hand histories to prove the fairness of their games. They have to provide such audits for slot machines to prove their actual take. You are right about one thing. Folks like BR will claim all the sites are rigged no matter what. I hear and read about claims that the casino slot machine advertised take is way low all the time; even though they are subject to strict state regulation. I'm not like those folks. If I was, then I would never have won any money at online poker.

If I can't beat the games on those sites, then I will employ the services of a coach. Actually, I was about to employ the services of a coach right before Black Friday; mostly to review my hand history and stats to find out if a coach could determine what changes I could make to improve matters. I had already contacted a person who I thought might be able to help, had arranged a rate and payment method, but then literally the next day was April 15. I will tell you that he thought that my problem could be variance, but could be some leaks also.

The good news is that IMO, it is better than 50% that the US will pass a law legalizing and regulating online poker this year. Sen. Reid recently told the Las Vegas newspaper that it would get done this year.

Ignored them? I might be getting you confused with somebody else and can't be bothered to find the specifics but didnt I pick the first stat you mentioned, had a basic look and found you were exactly on expectation overall and were using completely the wrong percentage to compare it to?

I don't call that ignoring them, do you?

If you are a bit more specific with your claims of suspicious stats rather than throwing random percentages about you might get somebody here or in the probability forum to discuss it with you. Based on past experience that discussion will result in the usual "yeah but, what about this" goalpost moving until people give up on you and you can then claim people are ignoring you again.



Hmmmmm...

Hmmmmm...

Do we have permission to just ignore these two comments?

Wow JP, i see you got gang-shilled by almost the whole menu of site promoters on here! Dont try to get into a real discussion with them, it only fuels their lies for others who are not sure yet the the deal is manipulated. Ive played on the rigged OLP sites for 8 years, Wiki has never played, think about it.
Use your common sense to do whats sensible. Since it seems manipulated to you and many others, it is, pretty simple. No need to go into detail.
Whatever you do, dont get sucked into the site promoters propaganda. Thats why they live in this thread.
Also, something interesting to think about. NOBODY wins in the long run. just a few to make things look respectable, but thats about it. Its the same with internet blackjack or casino games, the software isnt programmed to lose money.
I heard today they want to make OLP in calif. legal as it can bring in a profit of approx. 250 million dollars. Do you think that profit comes from letting players win? LOL.
All the site promoters will be here shortly to pick this post apart to suit their needs, so you need to ask yourself: do i want to believe site promoters, or someone whos played for years and knows why and how its rigged. Im not a programmer so I cant tell you the mechanics.

The second quote contains a typo. I meant didn't instead of did.

The third should be clear. From 2007-11, in weeks with a normal amount of bad beats (win weeks), I was profitable. In weeks, with abnormally high number of bad beats (lose weeks), I lost. From 2005-2009, the lose weeks were much fewer in number than in 2009-11. If my competition had improved so much over time, then I would have expected to break even or lose in the win weeks, but I continued to win in the win weeks. I'll admit that some of this was due to changes like raising pre-flop more often and value betting the turn and river more often. However, the lose weeks went from about one out of every 6 or so weeks to one in every 3. I have reviewed my hand histories and verified this experience more than once. I can't explain this experience any clearer.

But it'll be regulated in the US or are you throwing that cornerstone belief out the window with new deposit hook up and your (failed) superhuman memory?

Paranoia creeps up on people and before you know it you are saying things you never thought you would believe or say. Just be careful about that slippery slope.

When the industry is legislated in the US you will see this thread will become a more standard conspiracy debate where the US government is evil. I spoke to a 9/11 fanatic and explained to him how some poker riggies believe all conspiracies will be solved when the US gets involved with legislation and the reaction (sheer disbelief) was somewhat priceless.

You may be a bit different, but nearly all people that need to believe it is rigged will continue with that belief after the US is involved, and all that will happen is the US will be one of the parts of the conspiracy.

Look up Real Deal poker - a room run by riggies for riggies. All that happened was that riggies flooded their forums with claims it was rigged before they vanished.




Focus on your skills (your strengths and weaknesses) more than whether the world is operating in a major conspiracy against you for the past couple of years. The world does not care about whether you win or lose, but you should and the first thing you should look at if you can no longer win is yourself. That's been my point all along.

Best of luck.

You could. By using actual numbers rather than phrases like "normal amount" and "abnormally high" but it is easier to mislead people (intentionally or otherwise) if you say nothing specific, as you found out before.

As for your explanation of the third paragraph, why would your "win weeks" suddenly become "lose weeks" because because your edge over the field has reduced? They would more likely be "less win", the lose weeks "more lose" and more often.

I'm not sure what relevance there is in splitting hands into weeks but I suppose there could be some statistical significance in the results. If your edge has reduced you would expect your profitibilty to reduce fairly consistently over all the weeks. If your "win week" and "lose week" win and lose rates were the same extreme but the amount of each had shifted I supose this might be suspicious.

Yes, the win weeks were as good as ever and the lose weeks about the same amount of loss; that never changed. If the field became that much better I would expect more break even weeks and more slight loss weeks. But the number of break even to slight loss weeks or even slight win weeks didn't really vary. The number of bad loss weeks with numerous bad beats increased at the expense of really good win weeks. Thus, my doubts etc.

Welcome to the thread ..shill! what company are you here for?

Hi JP,
I am sorry but you can't have a rational conversation with some one wich uses these words in the same sentence.

Quote: Audit, regulation, Blah, Blah, Bla, Blah

Now that youve read a belly full of bull**** from all the site promoters, try some real responses from real players with common sense.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im858...eature=feedlikhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im858...eature=feedlik

i thought i was just a dreamer when did i get upgraded (downgraded?) to site promoter?

Don't feel too bad, you'll be upgraded (downgraded?) again soon.

Please stop saying this.

We are not saying there is no way, just that it's very improbable as (1) there are much better, safer, ways of defrauding your customers and (2) if they were rigging the deal they would get caught.

So you choose to believe that the largest OLP site is rigging its deal and that none of its hundreds of thousands of customers, many of whom have both enormous HH sets and advanced knowledge of stats and probability maths, have noticed.

Believe that if you wish.

It's about as likely as Esso watering down their petrol and no one detecting it.

I must admit I'd be fascinated to see this audit that will satisfy all the riggies.

So far no one has come up with any method of analysing HH's that will unequivocally show that there is no rigging of any type going on.

But I suppose that you believe that the US government will somehow 'magic up' some handy maths geniuses that will accomplish this previously impossible task.

And BR calls us dreamers.

LOL, there you go with the dreaming, again.

What happened was that:

Win weeks became break even weeks
Break even weeks became slight loss weeks
Slight loss weeks became large loss weeks

Which is exactly what you would expect to see if the field improved and you didn't.

You are perceiving a perfectly understandable change as:

Win weeks become large loss weeks

Which is (almost certainly) not what happened.

BR, you are pathetic.

You are nothing more than a joke.

Why don't you hush up for a while now that we have a few riggies who can at least hold an intelligent discussion?

I don't believe online poker is rigged, esp since I experience just as much bad beats in live games but these 2 hands happened within 3 minutes of each other-.-...





Both were all in postflop. Gst808.
/endrant

Glad you have the sense to realize that is not an indication of rigging. There are some here who would insist that it is absolute proof that that site is rigged. Agree that that must have been a very unusual and depressing three hands.

I've thought about it.

If it is rigged, then you are an idiot for playing on the sites and Wiki is correct not to.
If it is not rigged, then you are an idiot for believing it is, and Wiki is correct.

Either way, Wiki is right and you're an idiot.

I didn't realize that Wiki has never played. How did you find that out?

Make your mind up. Is it 'NOBODY' or is it 'just a few'?

Presumably your definition of 'site promoter' is someone who disagrees with you.

Probably from monty who decided one day, completely out of the blue, that he was the only 'shill' that played a significant amount of poker.

Pulling odd 'facts' out of thin air is something he has in common with the 'tards.

This is priceless.

Carlsberg don't make ******s, but if they did it would be Blatantly