You seem so sure of yourself, yet you will not bet about it.

No need to worry about the dozens of people who watched me play, nor the detailed blog entries about it (where I make fun of myself for being a live poker newbie (byproduct of finding gambling boring)).

You just state something you need to believe in, and then declare "got it" and the world is all better for you. No wonder you break so many of your possessions.

Now go get my damn fries.



Must have been hard for you to type that without inserting some sarcastic and/or disparaging remarks about native Americans or people who are not from the United States.




Hate to break it to you, but I do not watch MSNBC, and in fact I watch very little television in general.

Not all of us are TV addicted poker fanboys like you.

Shame about the racism though, that really makes talking to you much less fun.



Typically my response has nothing to do with the initial comment when the initial comment is just to get an angry racist or a zealot to talk, because what they say can be entertaining.

When I finally got TPTK to explode about 9/11 it was not because I had any interest in talking about 9/11 with him.

Same deal with you - it's just funny to hear angry people yell about stuff.

So, what are your thoughts about the Democrats taking back the House in 2012?


All the best.

Go ahead and find and quote the post where I said that. I'll wait. What the **** does that even mean?

How on God's green Earth does knowing exactly how often I should show down after raising preflop, betting at least 2 streets, and getting to the river without shoving before then and be up against TPWK help my game?

Just getting to the river in that scenario is something that happens 2% of the hands I play, filtering for hand strength probably makes it something that's happened to me less than 50 times in 70,000+ hands. No.

You've repeatedly said it doesn't happen enough on FTP. To say that, you need to know how often it happens.

You're the jackass making accusations, then trying to get other people to test it for you. Quote or link your source on this brilliant revelation.
I don't, and never claimed to. But someone needs to know it for the numbers to have any kind of meeting.

As of now, all we know is TPTK is capable of adding filters in HEM until he finds something that doesn't happen very often, and is then perfectly happy to use it as proof.

Proof of what, who the **** knows.

I can relate: Bingoboy, Canadiannoballs and you with your superhero need to defend the billion dollar industry from all criticisms with such rage filled responses that you can't separate your fantasy online identity from your real life persona, skills and abilities do create a strange blur.

Life is short, you must be proud of all your accomplishments.

Hardly.

There are many criticisms of the sites with which we jointly or singularly agree.

Customer service, crap software, closing accounts with insufficient evidence, greedy rake levels - the list is long.

It's just that there is plenty of evidence for all of this so we accept it happens and join in the criticism.

However, despite the tens of thousands of posts by the riggies and the 'tards, not one has provided credible evidence of a rigged deal.


Rage filled?

The sound you hear is laughter, not growling.

Riggies and 'tards are a perennial source of amusement.

Yes, but none of those accomplishments have anything to do with activities on this thread.

Monteroy, oral testimony does not always need statistical backup. If the witness can demonstrate good knowledge and experience playing poker, then his experience will be admissible. Also, his tracker stats can back up the claims of his experience. When I review my hand histories for the weeks that I lost and those that I won, almost every time I find many more bad beats in the weeks that I lost than I won. I could show this from my HEM records. I can also show that such weeks were more numerous after March 2009 than before. Mr. Schmidt cited his win-loss records at FTP versus other sites. These are valid statistical evidence that a site may be rigging.

Look at my last post, it could be statistical evidence that sites' deal of the cards has changed over the last few years. Not all statistical evidence has to be all in studies, flop analysis studies etc. to be admissible evidence or carry probative weight. And no site has ever presented a real audit of hand histories which would be the statistical evidence with by far the most probative value.

I agree that some "Riggies" will not change no matter what, but some "shills" seem to share this characteristic.

US state regulators will require proof positive from the sites that their deal is fair and random and require complete access to all data like software source codes and hand histories with all hole cards.

You might be correct that some of this evidence could persuade the court IF a site was rigging the deal.

However, if they weren't, they would be very easily able to hire top flight statisticians who would demolish the claims of a few players with basic analytical skills.

An interesting hypothesis but I'm not sure that it has any relationship to what would actually happen.

Do the regulators investigate every dealer at a live site?

I have already pointed out that examining the code is a fool's errand because unless the regulatory authority actually have physical possession of the servers and supply their own people to run them they can never be sure if the software that they examined is the software that is running.

Getting all HH's with hole cards would not be a problem and would allow them to examine a proportion of riggies claims. However, hole cards are not necessary and there has already been much analysis of HH's without any hint of malfeasance on the part of the sites.

Then provide proof. It's so easy. Yet you still refuse to do it and then launch into a pissing contest about making another bet like the good degen you are.

I know I know. You can't find any. So just keep to the MSNBC script that never fails. Claim somebody is racist. Inject fear. No proof needed. I have never said anything derogatory about any race here. I simply stated my disdain for the fact the Mohawks were facilitating illegal activity due to their immunity to Canadian law. I would have said that about any ethnic group in the same area of the world doing the same thing. Especially how they couldn't or refused to do jack when the players got ripped off.


I will ask yet again to provide the post that makes me racist. It would take you 2 minutes. Since you can't you can turn on MSNBC your favorite racebaiter Martin Bashir is on. He could give you some real pointers on some good racebaiting and fearmongering. You are failing badly.

Yawn.....

Hmmm. Obama polling in the toilet with independent voters. More than half the country wants health care repealed. More than half the country thinks country in headed in the wrong direction. Barney Frank bailing.

Hmmmm. Oh yea they have a great chance..

Election night will be so sweet. Hope you're around here. You will be in full racebaiting, lying mode. With your TV set to Rachel Maddow to give you support for the conspiracy theory you will run with.

Popcorn ready.

Wiki, the site would need an actual audit of all their hand histories for a given time period conducted by a third party with scientific statistical methods. The auditor would have to testify about his methods and access to the hand histories with all hole cards. No site has ever presented such an audit to the public. Maybe the some sites are rigging and can't provide this audit. Maybe some could do so and aren't rigging, but how do you know for sure? An argument that no one has ever presented proof positive that a site is rigging will not cut it in court when opposed by oral testimony from experienced poker players.

State regulators audit and regulate electronic slot machines to insure that their take complies with state regulations and the casino advertised claims. Audit and regulation of online poker sites would be similar and more reliable than your assertions that no site has ever rigged its deal.

Well, so you say, but I'm not so sure.

Consider an analogy where a few people say that a bank has been cheating them.

Asked what proof they have they come up with the following:

1) I have less money than I think I should have.
2) There are more debits on my account than I feel there should be.

When asked to provide statements to back up these 'feelings' the people in question either ignore the question of make absurd excuses for why they cannot do this whilst maintaining that it is 'obvious' that something is wrong.

Do you seriously believe that, on that sort of evidence, a court would demand that the bank provide all the source code? Or that a regulatory authority would demand a banks entire database and then spend the sums of money required to fully analyse it?

Because that is pretty much what you are suggesting would happen if a few supposedly 'expert' players made roughly similar accusations.

Whoop!

Whoop!

Whoop!

Straw Man Alert

I have never asserted that no site has ever rigged the deal.

All I have asserted is that, despite vast amounts of evidence and a large number of very interested parties, some of whom are extremely well qualified in the analyses required no one has managed to provide any evidence of rigging.

Stars did this, only they had the auditor check whether the winning hand was determined by luck or skill. Getting a third party to audit all hands would be fairly simple, but so far there's no point.

Riggies have already suggested Cigital isn't a good enough auditor to trust, so the sites have nothing to gain and money to lose having one done. Obviously if they had to go to court they'd have an incentive to get an audit done. Players can easily audit their own hands, and so far none of them have found anything shocking.

It'd be nice to see a recent audit, sure, but I don't think one's necessary to feel safe playing on a site.

To answer your first question, you can and I have. And yes, the bank checks its backup records, especially with ACH's. About two years ago, I was the victim of identity theft. The criminals were eventually caught and convicted in Texas by the local DOJ. I found two unknown and unauthorized payments to ATT who I always paid by check. The bank reimbursed me for both based on my statements that I did not authorize these ACH's. And yes, if you had debits in your account that you state you did not authorize then a bank better be able to prove that you did. Usually, they just reimburse you unless the amount is large.

To answer, your second question, you have almost said so, have rejected any claims or player stats that might suggest otherwise and demanded proof positive of rigging before you would ever believe that it might occur. You are entitled to your opinion, but IMO it is somewhat naive. It may be correct, but it may not be.

I kind of told you where you could read every gory detail about it whenever you like.

After a while it is purely entertaining to watch a little stubborn man like you maintain a position even you know is incorrect simply to avoid admitting defeat.

If you want to believe that I never cashed in a WSOP event that is fine with me.

If you ever want "proof" beyond all the evidence you could find in the blogs I already mentioned (which of course is plenty) then you need to put up some money, and for you I will lower it to $100 given that you likely have no money. That's only a couple days pay at your job.


Can you go into more details about your thoughts on the Mohawks?


Seriously, your MSNBC references are lost on me as am I not a TV addict like you, and have never watched MSNBC. All you are proving is one of us watches MSNBC all the time and it sure isn't me.

What are you thoughts about other countries regulations on online poker?






Do you think Obama was born in the US?



Dude, how much TV do you watch every week? How many of your TVs have you smashed?

What are your opinions about the Mohawks?

All the best.

Stars has never published an audit of their hand histories and the Cigital audit does not claim to be such an audit. It only claims to be a study of RNG software provided to it by Stars and does not claim to verify that Stars always uses this software to deal all its hands. So how meaningful is it? Players cannot audit their own hands because they do not know all the hole cards in any of their hands.

If you are willing to play based on available evidence that is fine. But don't claim that you know for sure or can be almost certain that no site rigs its deal. Just claim that in your opinion the odds of the site(s) that you play on rigging its deal are low enough for you to continue playing.

You claim to be a lawyer for 10 years. Seriously, just email Stars and ask for what you want and also ask why they have not done what you want and post the reply.

Why have you not done this yet?

If you want me to believe a site rigs it's deal the first thing you need to do is show me a way they can rig their deal without being caught (insider or outside with statistical studies) that actually makes money for the site. I will not even require it to be enough money to warrant the risk since riggies assume that any rig has zero risk.

You see all the riggie theories that have been posted. Small stacks win too much, big stacks win too much, new player boomswitches, doomswitches (that can take years to be applied), action hands, non-action hands, seasonal rigs, rigs based on types of computers or country of origin etc.

Which riggie theory do you believe exists?


If all you want is a statement that I accept the risk of rigging when I play then sure - I accept the risk of site rigging when I play (which I place at near zero and riggies place at 100%), just as I accept the risk of poison in food at places I eat, and the risk that other drivers will decide today is a good day to plow into as many cars as possible whenever I drive.

Not sure what this does other than acknowledging all activities come with a risk and reward portion.

There are several monumental differences in what you recount above:

1) There was a genuine, very specific, problem.
2) You correctly identified the problem with the evidence available to you.
3) The malfeasance was not on the part of the bank.
4) You did provide evidence of the problem.

You cannot equate that to a few degen gamblers wittering on about some vague feeling of unease for which, if it existed, they would be expected to have all the evidence they needed,

LOL at 'almost' said it.

We have not demanded 'proof positive'.

What we have demanded is at least some credible evidence.

Once one single riggie provides that we will be on the case like a tramp on chips and if the evidence is, indeed, sound then you can bet your life that within days, if not hours, there will a pretty massive scandal erupting, here.

I never said anything other than that, just that they're comfortable giving Cigital access to billions of complete hand histories. That's only true if there's no way to check hands without complete information. Fortunately, there are entire fields of math just for examining incomplete information, so it's not a problem. That's all I've ever done, and it's all I've ever seen "shills" say.

The only group that's claimed to be 100% certain are riggies.

No I don't. If you are a degen seek some help or work a real job. Works wonders.

So I take it your search failed to find any bigotry so you know try more racebaiting? Like I said before. I didn't like the fact the KGC used their immunity to law to circumvent the fact they were merely being a front group and taking money to facilitate offshore gaming. Which included being useless when players were robbed by Russ Hamilton. Due to the fact they were completely green to any sort of gaming. I then stated they would miss the money once the US signs a bill making them moot.

My offer is open as is the one asking you to prove you played in the world series. Provide any post of mine here disparaging any race. To back up your racebaiting propaganda.

I am of the belief that in the US all forms of gaming, drugs and prostitution should be legal. Since gaming over phone or internet is a federal deal I feel the fed should legalize it, tax it and regulate it. As it should also exist within it's borders. As for other countries I would like everyone to be able to play poker safely online. Why would it be any different? You can't legalize something offshore because the tax evasion is rampant.

Personally I do even though his records raise a lot of red flags. I think his father was an American hater and the fact Obama spent 20 yrs in a church even Oprah left after the anti US rhetoric started is telling. It's obvious he is a secular progressive and worshiped Alinsky. Which is why he will be shown the door. Not his skin color.

Ok, what is credible evidence? Look at my previous post on my TPTK hands over the last few years. You will dismiss it as the result of better opponents, but it might be credible evidence of some sites rigging the deal. Credible evidence is different for different folks which is why I used the standard admissible in court which is way below your standard.

You don't sound as ******ed as you used to. I think it's because blatantdude lowered the standard by a mile. Makes you look better. Still wrong about most things though.

He really does show how much the current crop of riggies utterly suck. So much more fun messing with him, and zero point with most of the latest riggies or gimmicks.

Anyway, on that note...



I admire the pride you take in your McDonalds work and here to add to your latest degen theory (since you seemed to have abandoned the nit thing) - I back well over 100 guys who play online poker!


You must think that makes me a total degen




It's interesting that you think people talking to you are always racebaiting you. Gee, what type of people will always think they are the targets of racebaiting...



As I said, read the blogs if you like since you lack the funds to bet on it if you do not believe it. An interesting side note is that a bunch of us exchanged percentages (for fun - or I guess in your world for degen gambling and or nittiness purposes), and I was the only one who cashed, so a lot of people who also played in the event are happy that my version of reality is the correct one.


Have you ever played a WSOP event? Yes or no?



That would remove a lot of risk of prosecution for you I suppose, so I can understand why you have those beliefs.



What are your thoughts about Oprah?


P.S. Want to see what a real degen is? Look at the guy who created these thread after losing cheeseburger money.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54...sk-pic-701345/

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54...r-pics-920492/



All the best.

Yes, pretty heavily rigged site. But then all the sites use the same software for deal manipulation.
You will get bombarded with the "variance" answer from the many site promoters/affiliates that clog this thread. Its one of their favorite arguments.

My theory is if a site was to rig its deal it would only rig the turn and the river in non-all in hands to make the odds better for the underdog. Such rigging might explain why my SECT (measure of expected winnings versus actual winnings in all showdown hands from my HEM) went from expected slightly less than actual in 2008 to much more than actual in 2009-11. Sure it might be luck over 500k hands per year, it might be suddenly better opponents or it might be such rigging. Also, such rigging would explain the sudden increase in scare cards on the turn or river when I flopped hands like TPTK, two pair using both hole cards or even a set, straight or flush. Such rigging might explain the decrease in winnings from these hands or the increase it losses from non-showdown hands. Of course, better opponents might explain such data.

My theory is really that no one knows, no one can be reasonably sure one way or the other. Whether sites like Stars now rig the deal in some manner, IMO is a close call.

Go to the Holdem Manager forums and ask how to set up a filter for exactly what you want, and then test it with your database and if your findings are interesting post them. Go to the stats forum and ask for help as well.

Realize that the EV tools in many of these programs are not perfect for post flop situations as they measure it on the odds from the time of the all-ins regardless of how many chips are bet at that time.

MY EV graphs are completely all over the place in SnGs because against the mega donks when I want to have fun I will go all in except a single chip (for one of us) pre-flop or on the flop, and then try to use "fold equity" on the turn by betting my single chip (have gotten a fold).

Imagine if 5399 chips goes in preflop with AA vs 55, but the last chip goes all in on the turn card of a 5 when the donk bets his last chip at that time. Even though 99.999% of the chips went in when I way ahead, the last chip on the turn went in when he was a 95/5 favorite so the expected equity of the hand will be much higher for him than it was in reality.

You are not a xenophobe or a crazed "everything is rigged against everyone all the time" kind of guy, so why not so the research I suggest and email the sites as I suggest and post the results. That would be interesting to read and might educate some of these other riggies how to actually properly research their beliefs for a change.

THIS is more like it. Nice to read something like this instead of the B.S. dribble from Monteroy, wiki, and the rest of the goofs financially tied to the OLP scam. Straight forward and to the point. Those guys you mentioned seem naive by reading their posts, but I dont think thats the case. I would have to believe they know darn well these sites are rigged. Its in their best interest to sway peoples good judgement and common sense. They just wouldnt put so much time and effort into this thread.
I have played online poker for years and Im sure all these sites are rigged. Just as many others would agree.