well do a * real test* done by * real scientists* Don't have someones shady uncle frankenstein doing the floating led experiment in a back office in diluted salt water where everything floats. Online poker is all about appearences. Not realities. Paying extra money to give the appearence oif something is far more profitiable in the end. Online poker is comparable to watching a taped David Blaine magic special. Its real isn't it? The network says its real. The producers say its real. They hired a few yahoos to go around and preach its real citing all the reasons why. Ya! Must be.. Must be

I liked the part where you quoted and replied to yourself, and replied to the same post Wiki made twice, all within 6 minutes.

Why would you trust a company you believe is cheating you in a manner you can't discover to not alter evidence given to an auditor?

All an audit does for a site is cost them however much the auditors charge, it's not going to change the minds of any riggies. Hundreds of scientists have confirmed the US moon landings, so there shouldn't be any morons who think it was fake, right?

are people really that naive without financial obligations to believe companies that will lie and cheat federal banks and break federal LAW are honest and fair and not cheating us with an rng. LOL. How naive are people

Did you do the calculations yourself to illustrate that?
Did you use one of the available tools created by somebody else to check?
Or did you just make it up?


a) You have no power
b) You are almost certainly doing nothing
c) Online poker isn't illegal

Are you lying again you lying liar?

Did Enron withhold electricity to their customers?

But given you've come to your conclusions by observing handhistories, how do you then conclude they are irrelevant?

But how can you be sure, if you did all of this in your head? How did you verify that you didn't miss anything? Or made a mistake?

When you have multiple gimmicks it can be tricky to keep them all in line.

I think you are missing my point here is an example.If there was say 200 rigged hands out of a sample of 10,000 hands vs there is 200 rigged hands out of 10,000,000 hands,the % would be nil on the later & would be written off as variance.Anyways Im not trying to start crap just wondering what your thoughts are on this

Pretty sure that the sample size needed depends entirely on the question being asked. It varies depending on what you are measuring. (ie: you could prove rigging pretty conclusively in 20 hands if it were 20 AA in a row) It can be calculated by those who know how.

It's always fun to stop by from time to time and see who the latest genius is ITT.

It is always fun when people make up numbers without any way to back them up, well played. Still didn't get any fresh air, huh?

200 out of 10,000,000 would be written off as variance because it wouldn't have any real effect either way on the hands.

As much as hellojello loves to point out that the sites will "fraud" governments to make money, rigging .002% of the hands you deal isn't going to make you more money.

Riggies all claim to see certain patterns that make rigging "obvious" to the naked eye, but the amount of hands that would need to be rigged for this to be true would be so astronomical that you'd only need a few thousand hands to prove it, like with potripper.

no but when you say online pokeris not illegal you are. Tell that to someone in America. Liar. They frauded banks? Is that a lie?

How about ONLY 60% of people polling this thread think online is random when its flooded with shills and promoters. Am I making up the fact these sites frauded banks and money laundered? It's ok though they paid out to customers with money from a bogus rng. LOL. Nothing like someone reaching in to my pocket to take my wallet and pay me with my own money

Fraud isn't a verb, dummy.

how about money laundering?

how does that even make sense?

In several other threads I have been critical towards the companies. I've only ever played for money on Stars and 888, so I've been most critical of those. I think Stars' efforts to get round the UEIGA was unethical and deeply troubling to me as a customer. I think 888 charging fees for "dormant" accounts is disgusting. And yet the rigtards think I'm a shill for one of, or both, of those companies!
I want new players who read the thread to realise that only the paranoid and delusional believe the games are rigged. I want people to exercise some critical thinking, instead of believing a load of made up bull*****. I want recreational players to trust in the RNGs, because I love the game of poker and I want as many people to play it as possible.
Poker gets a bad press as it is. The last thing poker needs is a bunch of losing players telling newbies that the game is rigged. If idiots like BR and HJ are going to post their ludicrous theories, then someone has to point out how wrong they are.
I can't be bothered to keep doing it. Hopefully new readers will use their brains and be able to sort the fact from the fiction. It shouldn't be hard. Evidence of BR and Jello's idiocy is on every page of the thread for the last 8 months.

1. SELECTIVELY RIGGED. Yes, that is the key. The deal is manipulated depending on your individual situation. (too much profit, cash out, etc.) You are tracked by your IP address and manipulated with additional software.
Sarcastic or gimmick makes no difference here. The point of selective rigging is correct.
2. GOOD. Keep up the good fight.

+1000000

Amazing isnt it.
Shills/affiliates, etc. are not in that category though. They already know how corrupt OLP is. Theyre here to do a job. Dupe newbies into believing it is fair, even though it obviously is not.

I wonder what proportion of 2+2 members would support you in this cause.

Ban this troll, imo.

Its only been illegal for U.S. players since 2006.

Not bothered about the rest of the thread but what's this? Is it still going now or what?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in994766.shtml

I didn't know polls were the deciding factor when deciding the validity of a claim.

Pretty sure that it has to disguise illegal activity for something to be money laundering. Not a lawyer, so don't take my word for it.

It wouldn't be if that were the actual case.

Is this a reference to Full Tilt? I agree, but that doesn't prove a rigged rng. It proves mostly incompetency by those who were running the company.