Wouldn't these witnesses need to prove whatever it is they are claiming takes place with regard to specific RnG rigging?

Pretty sure "I see patterns" will not quite cut it in a court of law.


How about you explain what you think a witness will say specifically with regard to RnG rigging and then see how you handle some cross examination questions.

Why haven't you posted the actual numbers from your database on rigged and non rigged sites? Other than the fact that everyone in this thread knows that you are a proven liar and can't be trusted.


BTW, with reference to you moving the goalposts and changing your claim that it never hapens to that it happens less than it should, I just thought I would post this as a reminder for you:

Well said, very honest and to the point.
One error though, the shills and promoters already know what goes on at these scam sites.

I totally agree. Hellojello's well thought out and perfectly constructed arguement has now convinced me it's rigged and I wish to change my vote in the poll.

If only someone could have explained it so clearly earlier in the thread.

I'm indebted to him for helping me see the light.

Now if he could only learn to use the return key, others may also be enlightened.

I've just checked this again. I haven't filtered for who raised pre, but will do so if you think it's important.
On Stars, I've had TPTK on the flop and reached showdown (without an all in) 26 times of a total of 27,000 hands dealt. I improved to 2pr, trips, a straight or flush sometimes. Do you want me to eliminate those hands? If not, I won 12 of those pots where I started with TPTK, chopped two, and lost 12, making a loss of a couple of dollars.

I'm not sure at all how this can be used as evidence of rigging. How many times is it supposed to happen?

Here's one where I just called 3 streets and won w/ AK vs AT.



But maybe that doesn't count, because villain didn't have TPWK. He had a different pair, top kicker. :/

I think the following hand is the only time on Stars I've ever reached showdown with TPTK and villain had TPWK.

Grabbed by Holdem Manager
NL Holdem $0.02(BB) Replayer
SB ($2)
BB ($0.80)
UTG ($2)
UTG+1 ($5.66)
UTG+2 ($0.98)
MP1 ($1.86)
Hero ($1.97)
BTN ($2.06)

Dealt to Hero K A

fold, fold, UTG+2 calls $0.02, fold, Hero raises to $0.08, fold, fold, fold, UTG+2 calls $0.06

FLOP ($0.19) A 6 5

UTG+2 checks, Hero bets $0.12, UTG+2 calls $0.12

TURN ($0.43) A 6 5 8

UTG+2 checks, Hero checks

RIVER ($0.43) A 6 5 8 Q

UTG+2 bets $0.20, Hero calls $0.20

UTG+2 shows 9 A
Hero shows K A

Hero wins $0.79

FWIW, I still only have 2 hands of TPTK beating TPWK on 888, but the sample size is about half of the number of hands I have on Stars.
I'm still not sure how using this filter provides rigging (on either or any) site. About all I can say for sure is that "Sometimes fish call down with dominated hands, but it's quite rare for TPTK to win against TPWK."

Don't bother to post hands, he will just dismiss them for not being on Tilt or there not being betting on the turn or the moon was in the wrong cycle etc.

Fact is even in the realm of riggie theories his latest thing is really a dumb one as it is an intricate rig based on the behavior of players that can vary, and that adds a whole new dimension to a rig that is completely impractical with thousands of players in unlimited combinations.

At least the boom switch for new accounts, or even that guy's weird seasonal based rig are simpler and do not require adjustments based on humans and their unpredictable behavior as they play poker for them to work (if they existed). They just require riggies to ignore any examples that do not conform to it, and riggies are very good at selective memory.

ArtySmokes.........02 cent BB's???????????????
All this for those stakes? I thought you people played for real money. Hell, even I dont care if the 2 cent tables are rigged. (Even though they are, theres no discrimination).

Figures you ignore hellojello, since his posts are on the money.
TPTK27 stuff makes no sense so you harp on that. Typical.

You played O8. At any stake for you it was basically flipping a coin.

merge is nothing but a compilation of bad beats. i get in good 90% of the time and lose 80% of that. i guess 8 months and it still the same so i dont want to hear about variance. fn bs!

hellojello's posts are nothing but walls of text.

TPTK27 may be completely wrong in his thought process, but at least his posts are readable.

No, not necessarily. The witnesses would have to a lot of poker experience. But I have read posts from people claiming to be professionals who play live poker and win, but claim to lose online; often in streaks of numerous bad beats. If such a person testified about such streaks (especially with a record of such streaks from a tracker program) and then testified that a similar streak had never happened to them in live poker, this testimony would be accepted as evidence for a jury to consider. Remember the post by Mr. Dusty Schmidt about FTP which was linked in a previous post in this forum. His testimony about his experience at FTP would likely be accepted as evidence for a jury to consider in a trial considering if FTP was rigged.

Such testimony would shift the burden of proof to the site to prove that its deal was fair and random. Only an audit of hand histories by a third party auditor who testifies in court about such audit would likely suffice for a judge to rule that the site conclusively met such a burden and that no reasonable jury could conclude that it was not rigged. And a jury could reject such an audit and find that a site is rigged unless the judge ruled that such evidence meant that no reasonable jury could find that it was rigged. I would hope that with such an audit presented as evidence that a judge would rule that a jury could not find the site to be rigged and end the case in favor of the site. Unfortunately, judges often refuse to make such rulings no matter what the evidence which is why the US legal system resembles a lottery. For certain, without such an audit, a site would have a difficult case refuting such oral testimony by reliable witnesses of odd or unusual deals of the cards in the experience of the witness.

So if the right witness testifies about such "patterns," very unusual bad beat streaks or other experience that suggests that a site's deal was not fair and random, then in a US court, the site better present very strong evidence to prove that its deal is fair and random. Just a report by a company that the software provided to it by the site was a fair and random RNG would be easy to refute by asking the company's rep if the company verified the use of such RNG and how it did so. The all in analysis would certainly be valid evidence for a site, but not conclusive, because the preparer of the all in analysis would have to admit that it covers very few of the hands dealt by the site.

In sum, Monteroy, in a US court, some jurors are going to be more like BR than yourself or Wiki. At best, you can expect jurors to be like TPTK27. Ditto for the judge. So arguments like no one out of millions of players has ever presented statistical evidence that any site is rigged, thus no site is rigged is not likely to prevail in a US court or even convince a judge that no reasonable jury could conclude that a site was rigged. This is just one reason why no site has located in the US, or UK.

It is also why, I have told you that I would trust any site located in the US, subject to US jurisdiction and licensed by a state of the US. The government regulators insist on the site maintaining internal controls and data to show that their deal is fair and random, it will insist on access to such data and a periodic audit of such data by independent parties. In addition, all such US sites will keep such data to prove in a court of law that their deal of the cards is fair and random.

No existing online poker site has ever met such a standard. They are not required to do so by their current regulators. This failure combined with the poor behavior of companies like Cereus, FTP and even Poker Stars (it committed bank fraud in the US) causes me and others to question their credibility in the issue of fair and random deal of the cards. It's not that I am convinced that all of them rig deals. In fact, I am only convinced that FTP did so because I have seen some statistical evidence that they did (APCW audit). I think that most sites were not rigged before 2009, but the deteriorating market conditions since then (especially since the demise of Epassporte, the last wide scale ewallet to serve US sites) may have caused some sites to rig to keep weaker players from having to deposit as often. I admit that I base this belief on my experience. But I'm not the only one.

The real problem is that no one knows the truth. IMO, you and Wiki and other so-called "shills" (I don't believe that you or them are paid or compensated by sites to defend the sites) are somewhat naive to think and opine that little chance exists that any site rigs its deal just because no one has found hard statistical evidence to show rigging. IMO, a reasonable chance (40-60%) exists that one or more sites (outside of FTP) has and does rig its deal.

Your witness would be destroyed on cross if all he had was his basic impression.

And no, the burden of proof would not shift.

They are almost definitely a scam but are not even close to the world's biggest.
That honor goes to the "Federal" Reserve and the trillions of dollars in bailout money, forcibly taken from taxpayers, and given to big banks and corporations.
Quit whining about your poker being rigged because the entire world is rigged.

Pics or GTFO.

How would they look when the other side then puts up the stats experts that show billion hand studies which refute what these guys claim are "bad streaks" without any actual documentation or proof?

You think a poker player is actually a profession that would inspire innate trust in a jury?


He had no evidence and later on pulled that blog because it was basically an emotional vent (don't confuse genuine riggies with bad beat whiners).

He also has a colorful personality in this industry that might not work with a jury quite as well as you might think. I seriously have no idea why you think if he testified that would even help the case.


Pretty sure the various audits the sites have done as well as the many huge hand studies might be a bit more convinving.

Let's see - on one side you have Pokerstars showing

http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/rng/

the details of their Cigital studey and if they are in a festive mood they can link spadebidder's billion hand study.

On the other you have a dude semi-known in the poker world (but totally unknown outside it) saying he thinks beats happen more often then live games.

I am pretty sure I know which side will win.




Go to any legal forums and post your theories there and see what they say on the matter. I suspect you will not get the answers you believe in.



On the one side are the sites with studies done by respected institutions.

On the other is a poker dude nobody in the jury has ever heard about talking about bad beats.

This even assumes that the one side puts on a poker player to talk about patterns, but I doubt that any lawyer would even do that and even if he/she tried it likely would not be allowed in because it has no basis in fact.



I hate to break it to you but most of the population has absolutely zero opinion about online poker with regard to whether it is rigged or not.

Your whole foundation of beliefs is completely flawed, because how can any jury system function under them. How can any criminal get a fair trial when many jurors might have strong opinions about 9/11 or Bernie Madoff?


Your trust will fade when you lose with aces a couple times in a row. You will start to wonder if the government is not regulating it properly or if they are in on it or some other variation.

Even if somehow you do get comforted the fact is nearly every other riggie you see here will still think the US rooms are rigged, and new riggies that think the US government is evil will create theories around them as well.

I dare you to ask a 9/11 zealot if he agrees the online poker industry will be saved by US legislation.


Then don't play there. That is the power you have as a consumer.


My prop bet still stands and I am giving 2-1 odds so the math of that situation means you have the right pot odds to make that prop bet. $1,000 minimum that no major network will be shown to have a rigged RnG by the end of 2012.

You will not take that bet and no riggie ever will.

I also don't care if riggies think people here (including myself) are paid to defend sites. That belief makes me laugh. Most of the shill do not play much at all, and some play casually at small stakes and these guys think that is a paid army? Kind of sad comedy.

I appreciate the time and thought you put in your post, but one element you completely leave out is the context of this topic in the world in general (completely unimportant) and even the poker community.

Look at all the 2+2 forums with tons of strategy, staking and other forums, and look at all of the content you can find here. Add in a ton of coaching sites and kickback sites as well, and riggies play (aside from this thread) nothing of a role in any of them.

The who riggie religion is basically in this and a few other threads and youtube videos. This thread gives riggies a much greater sense of importance than really exists in the world (real and poker world) and you are carrying that flawed inflated importance belief into your whole US judicial system arguments.

Omg you idiots are still here beating this to death? Monteroy must be doing great the tables he is wasting so much time here.

FTP is gone. The rest who cares let the Canadians and Euros play. We will be getting legal, regulated no rigged online poker next year. Hey Monteroy missed you at the WSOP. No cashes?

Unlike judges and juries in other countries who simply ignore credible witnesses?

The only problem with your little fantasy is that all the rigged side have got is a lot of 'feelings' from various sources. And I can promise you that in any US court along with courts in most of the rest of the world, expert testimony from statisticians will trump vague feelings any day.

And, despite the incessant whining from the riggies and the availability of many tens of millions of hand histories, not one person has been able to come up with a single shred of evidence that the deal has been rigged by any major site.

And if you ask a professional statistician to verify the deal is fair he is going to say exactly the same as the 'shills' here: "What anomaly do you want me to look for?"

And if you say: "I want you to certify that the deal is free of any and every possible anomaly", he will say "that can't be done there are simply too many possible ways to rig the deal."

The world is rigged, by GOD. IF YOU DON'T PRAY YOU PAY.

Actually, the staking business is better than ever, thanks for your concern.

I did not look for you when at the WSOP, and indeed I did cash. Thanks for your concern on that as well. Perhaps one day you will play in some of those events instead of watching them and obsessing about poker pros (as your other posts indicate from a simple search).

We both look forward to the US being legislated because we are ready to go whenever that happens. You will still be a solitary losing micro donk and rage-a-holic (a rusty one at that) and the US rooms will create as many broken monitors, keyboards, and dreams for you as any other room in the past.

All the best.

The composition of the riggies may change a bit. Replace the raging xenophobes with the raging govt. conspiracy types.