Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > > >

Discussion of Poker Sites General discussion of online poker sites.

View Poll Results: Is Online Poker Rigged?
Yes 3,445 34.94%
No 5,522 56.01%
Undecided 892 9.05%
Voters: 9859. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-08-2009, 02:00 AM   #4451
burden2
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 969
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Another point that I, a riggedologist, would like to make. A lot of you people have never really spent a lot of time in actual brick and mortar casinos. You deposited online, ran well, and defend the institution with your dying breadth. But for those of us, myself included, who know a lot of casino employees, have been in the environment etc have a better understanding of the mentality of people who run gambling establishments. They are more or less scum. They would much rather just have people walk into a room and put their cash or property deeds into a big collection bag then actually do a damn thing and if they can cheat you they will. That is why I have a problem accepting a random shuffle as the null hypothesis. Those that assume fairness as the null simply do not know people, and certainly do not know people in the gambling business.
burden2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 02:09 AM   #4452
DMoogle
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DMoogle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern VA, USA
Posts: 7,138
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by burden2 View Post
Another point that I, a riggedologist, would like to make. A lot of you people have never really spent a lot of time in actual brick and mortar casinos. You deposited online, ran well, and defend the institution with your dying breadth.
I have never deposited online, I admit I ran well in the beginning (can't have started a career with 90 cents and still be going without running well), and I won't defend the "institution" with my dying breath.

I also admit I haven't spent much (well, any) time in brick and mortar casinos, but I'm sure they aren't all run by scum.
DMoogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 02:36 AM   #4453
elgreenhornet
old hand
 
elgreenhornet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,773
Re: What site has more bad beats??

stars has more coolers for me today
elgreenhornet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 03:35 AM   #4454
AceCroupier
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 767
Re: What site has more bad beats??

Quote:
Originally Posted by MicroBob View Post
But he didn't ask that. He asked for which site has more bad beats which is roughly the same as asking which site deals more hands or has more tables running. So I answered the Q he was asking and I am 100% correct IMO!!!!
What if he's really asking about the Beats per Minute?
Could mean that FTP uses Trance to generate random numbers and stars uses Country?
AceCroupier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 03:53 AM   #4455
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokErasmus View Post
Thanks for pointing that out, being a not native English speaker and learning this language at adult age I’ve never knew that rule about the uncountable noun. I did not even know uncountable noun exists :-))) I have been frequently apologies for my poor English here being aware that it must be painful for the native speakers to read such a crap grammar and writing like mine.
People using English as a second or subsequent language are, of course, excluded from accusations of idiocy for such mistakes.

It's native speakers who do it that look so dumb.

Quote:
Having said that, it says a lot about you idiot arrogant shill that you gave to this thread nothing else but lecturing about English and your usual idiotic personal rants.
Ah, so you haven't read the thread?

If you had you would see that I'd posted various explanations and reasoning concerning RNG's and deal rigging generally.

When the rigtards and sundry **** for brains can't put a hole in what I've written they resort to either ignoring it completely or throwing around accusations of shilling.
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 04:17 AM   #4456
senjitsu
banned
 
senjitsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: λαγχάν
Posts: 3,058
Re: What site has more bad beats??

Quote:
Originally Posted by MicroBob View Post
break - you probably don't play well. Your stats probably do speak for 'them self' but probably not in the way you think they do. The things you are seeing at the table probably aren't that ridiculous.

But regardless of all that, FTP has way more bad beats than Cake and it's pretty obvious. I disagree with Mitch that it is a result of the site being looser though. PokerStars is probably the tightest if we include them in the group yet they have way more bad beats than both Cake and FT combined. Here's why!!


Current numbers:
Cake - 6.3k players
FT - 79k payers
Stars - 135k players
per capita bad beats imo
senjitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 04:41 AM   #4457
DevWil
veteran
 
DevWil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tactical Pot Limit Omaha
Posts: 2,142
Re: What site has more bad beats??

bodog for sure.

i just can't beat the dealer in carribean hold 'em. i was only betting in $5 units though. i need to move up to where the dealer respects my raises. think $10 will do it? guy just never folds.
DevWil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 04:46 AM   #4458
AceCroupier
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 767
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

A few days ago I (the dealer) dealt out three (3) consecutive flops of the same rank and suit (Q83), using a shuffle machine and two decks. Twice during these 3 hands the board paired eights on the turn. Someone had (or claimed to have) 83o in all three hands.

Does this mean live poker is rigged too? And to whose benefit?
AceCroupier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 04:54 AM   #4459
DMoogle
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DMoogle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern VA, USA
Posts: 7,138
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceCroupier View Post
A few days ago I (the dealer) dealt out three (3) consecutive flops of the same rank and suit (Q83), using a shuffle machine and two decks. Twice during these 3 hands the board paired eights on the turn. Someone had (or claimed to have) 83o in all three hands.

Does this mean live poker is rigged too? And to whose benefit?
I don't believe that for a second.
DMoogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 04:58 AM   #4460
AceCroupier
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 767
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by DMoogle View Post
I don't believe that for a second.
The casino will have footage of this event, but you are not allowed to see it.
AceCroupier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 04:59 AM   #4461
vezj420
adept
 
vezj420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: meh, flesh wound, imo.
Posts: 831
Re: What site has more bad beats??

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceCroupier View Post
What if he's really asking about the Beats per Minute?
Could mean that FTP uses Trance to generate random numbers and stars uses Country?
lol...before I leave you with Beck's lyrics, here's my opinion:

FTP, blamed for their continuous shuffling method, used to be Bad Beat Central. I still see a lot of ridiculous hands on there, but I feel they have somewhat reduced. I was seriously thinking of switching over to some other site as well, but started hearing bad beat stories at Stars and Cake. It's okay though, as long as you keep yourself out of trouble, you will win over the long term.

Lately, however, I've started despising pocket Kings (KK) because I've run into AA close to 75% of the time I hold them. Now I just gotta learn how to let them go preflop when a nitty villain 4bets big.

BECK - 1000 BPM
---------------------
Electronic actors and astromagnetic
Corrupted files from galactical planets
Writing interplanet code
Thoughts get transported
From neanderthal skulls
Digital food malls
Telemarketing people
With cellular headsets on their skulls
Selling you wisdom
From a plexiglass prism
Biochemical jism
Hits you with its rhythm
They act like Earth
Was a terrestial prison
A zoo for humans
Put their cities into ruins
Now we can feel what we're doing
We move the stratosphere in plastic
When you're out alive, spastic
What else can the dust try to tell us?
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute

Categorizing in a crash
Taking pictures
And a backstage pass
Gasoline on fire
Tried to pull off this mask
But there was really a face
Which I just read from a plan
Security cameras strapped to his back
Fulfilled prescriptions, antidotes
Media in a quarantined submission
Consultants with remote souls
Unanimous votes
Portions of the proceeds
Go to chain store victims
In the midget conditions
With remodeled kitchens
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
Comin' to you
One thousand beats per minute
vezj420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 05:28 AM   #4462
Pyromantha
veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,228
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokErasmus View Post
It’s more than close - the samples I have posted are two consecutive deals.

Just like the Intel hardware RNG would not produce two consecutives similar 1024 digits integer in the next 10,000 years, it would not produce dataset that results in two consecutive exactly similar deals and result to the same individual at the same table in a very long period. Still, these things happening at PS site daily bases.
You're the worst kind of idiot - one who thinks he can hide his idiocy behind long words and 'technical sounding' vocabulary.

Firstly - what do 1024 digit integers have to do with anything?

As a software engineer I'm sure you understand enough basic mathematics to know that there are 52! ways of shuffling a deck of cards. This is a lot less than 2^1024, in fact it's less than 2^226 so you are about 2^798 away in terms of your estimation of likelihood even if they were the *exact* same hand. (or 10^240). Being 10^240 out in your guess is pretty impressive - it's like guessing that an electron was millions of times bigger than the universe.

You haven't defined 'similar' at all. It's not clear why you think these numbers are similar in any way, apart from that they result in different positions at the table getting the same rank of card as a previous hand.

Here is how a shuffle algorithm works - it takes a non-shuffled deck in some pre-arranged state, say Ac2c...Kc..Ad..Ah..As..Ks for the sake of discussion. It then takes a random number from 1-52 by looked at the first 6 digits of the RNG output and discarding them if they are between 53 and 64 and taking the next block of six. When a block of six yields a number between 1 and 52 it moves the Ac to that position in a separate list and then looks at the next block of 6 digits to move the 2c.... etc. When there are less than 33 possible positions remaining it only looks at the next block of five digits.

If you are capable of any kind of rational thought and actually do have some kind of relevant qualification here is something you could consider:

Look at the two hands, the button position and the exact rank of cards dealt. Calculate what you can determine of the random output from the RNG for that hand. You will have a lot of unknown digits as (for example) if the Ac was not dealt you will not know what the first six digits from the RNG were. For ease of calculation you can assume no digits were ever discarded (this would only strengthen your argument).

Now you have a list of 0s and 1s with a lot of gaps for both hands. You say that the Intel RNG could not produce these two sets of digits.

Firstly: what is it about the two sets of digits that makes them similar? The RNG only produces a list of 0s and 1s so your statement cannot involve entities such as 'Nines of Diamonds'. What is it about the two lists of 0s and 1s that makes them similar in any way?

Do they have an surprisingly large amount of matching digits?
If you translate one of the lists by some number of places, do they have a surprisingly large amount of matching digits then?

Ok - so if you are not a complete rigtard and actually had a genuine point, you now have a clear statement about what it is that makes these two lists of 0s and 1s 'impossible to occur in the next 10,000 years'.

Now go calculate how likely your statement about these two specific lists is to happen for two completely arbitrary lists of 255 0s or 1s. Then assume that a site deals a million hands a day. How far out was your 10000 years estimate? I would guess it's about a factor of ten million out, even if you manage to come up with some definable statement about what makes the lists unusual. So in fact, if you got this far, you will see that it's not surprising that such things happen on a daily basis on any site.

edit: yes I know I'm wasting my time with this idiot, but I was bored okay - maybe some other rigtard could have a go at it !

Last edited by Pyromantha; 06-08-2009 at 05:41 AM.
Pyromantha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 06:44 AM   #4463
Josem
human chemical weapon
 
Josem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Getting Trolled
Posts: 17,957
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

FYI, there are 498 bits used for each shuffle at PokerStars, double the 249 bits required:

Here's a table showing how many bits of data are needed to choose from N remaining cards:

52 = 6 bits needed 35 = 6 bits needed 18 = 5 bits needed
51 = 6 bits needed 34 = 6 bits needed 17 = 5 bits needed
50 = 6 bits needed 33 = 6 bits needed 16 = 4 bits needed
49 = 6 bits needed 32 = 5 bits needed 15 = 4 bits needed
48 = 6 bits needed 31 = 5 bits needed 14 = 4 bits needed
47 = 6 bits needed 30 = 5 bits needed 13 = 4 bits needed
46 = 6 bits needed 29 = 5 bits needed 12 = 4 bits needed
45 = 6 bits needed 28 = 5 bits needed 11 = 4 bits needed
44 = 6 bits needed 27 = 5 bits needed 10 = 4 bits needed
43 = 6 bits needed 26 = 5 bits needed 9 = 4 bits needed
42 = 6 bits needed 25 = 5 bits needed 8 = 3 bits needed
41 = 6 bits needed 24 = 5 bits needed 7 = 3 bits needed
40 = 6 bits needed 23 = 5 bits needed 6 = 3 bits needed
39 = 6 bits needed 22 = 5 bits needed 5 = 3 bits needed
38 = 6 bits needed 21 = 5 bits needed 4 = 2 bits needed
37 = 6 bits needed 20 = 5 bits needed 3 = 2 bits needed
36 = 6 bits needed 19 = 5 bits needed 2 = 1 bit needed
1 = 0 bits needed
Josem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 06:53 AM   #4464
Pyromantha
veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,228
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josem View Post
FYI, there are 498 bits used for each shuffle at PokerStars, double the 249 bits required:

Here's a table showing how many bits of data are needed to choose from N remaining cards:

52 = 6 bits needed 35 = 6 bits needed 18 = 5 bits needed
51 = 6 bits needed 34 = 6 bits needed 17 = 5 bits needed
50 = 6 bits needed 33 = 6 bits needed 16 = 4 bits needed
49 = 6 bits needed 32 = 5 bits needed 15 = 4 bits needed
48 = 6 bits needed 31 = 5 bits needed 14 = 4 bits needed
47 = 6 bits needed 30 = 5 bits needed 13 = 4 bits needed
46 = 6 bits needed 29 = 5 bits needed 12 = 4 bits needed
45 = 6 bits needed 28 = 5 bits needed 11 = 4 bits needed
44 = 6 bits needed 27 = 5 bits needed 10 = 4 bits needed
43 = 6 bits needed 26 = 5 bits needed 9 = 4 bits needed
42 = 6 bits needed 25 = 5 bits needed 8 = 3 bits needed
41 = 6 bits needed 24 = 5 bits needed 7 = 3 bits needed
40 = 6 bits needed 23 = 5 bits needed 6 = 3 bits needed
39 = 6 bits needed 22 = 5 bits needed 5 = 3 bits needed
38 = 6 bits needed 21 = 5 bits needed 4 = 2 bits needed
37 = 6 bits needed 20 = 5 bits needed 3 = 2 bits needed
36 = 6 bits needed 19 = 5 bits needed 2 = 1 bit needed
1 = 0 bits needed
Well it's not strictly double the 'needed' bits, because a lot of bits get discarded by the shuffle process, i.e. with 33 possible positions left a 6 digit number is needed, but any 6 digit number from 34-64 is discarded. i.e. if you only generated 249 bits this would only be enough to shuffle if no number was ever discarded (which is very unlikely). The best way of explaining it might be that '249 bits are used to place the cards, and all other bits are discarded during the shuffling process, in a manner which ensures the fair distribution of shuffles'.

I expect the 498 bits are done so that there will always be many spare even counting discarded bits, and I expect that all the left over bits are just discarded. Someone with more time on their hands than me could probably show that 498 bits is 'always' enough for the algorithm as describe on the PS website (i.e. the universe is likely to end before so many bits get discarded that 498 is not enough).

The reason I ignored the discarded bits in what I wrote to pokerasmus is that they help the 'non-rigtard' argument.

What I mean by that is, suppose that the Ac ends up in position 1, then ignoring discards we know that the 6-digit number used to place the Ac was 000001. If you include discarded bits, then it could have been '000001' or '111111000001' or '111101000001' etc as in the latter two numbers the first two blocks of six get discarded.

So two deals where the Ac ends up in position 1 can start in more ways than just '000001'. If we ignore these extra ways and just say that Ac in position 1 = rng output started with 000001, then the numbers will look more 'similar', so PokErasmus might be able to find some kind of pattern.

Otherwise his list of the RNG output will have an unknown amount of unknown discarded digits, and there's no chance in hell he would be able to find any pattern. Have to give him a fair chance!

Last edited by Pyromantha; 06-08-2009 at 07:01 AM.
Pyromantha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 08:54 AM   #4465
Monteroy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,093
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by burden2 View Post
Another point that I, a riggedologist, would like to make. A lot of you people have never really spent a lot of time in actual brick and mortar casinos. You deposited online, ran well, and defend the institution with your dying breadth. But for those of us, myself included, who know a lot of casino employees, have been in the environment etc have a better understanding of the mentality of people who run gambling establishments. They are more or less scum. They would much rather just have people walk into a room and put their cash or property deeds into a big collection bag then actually do a damn thing and if they can cheat you they will. That is why I have a problem accepting a random shuffle as the null hypothesis. Those that assume fairness as the null simply do not know people, and certainly do not know people in the gambling business.
Congrats on at least making a decision and embracing the riggedology faith.

I actually agree that live poker rooms and casinos can be quite a dreadful place in terms of mood. Poker rooms are often dull, angry places filled with degens and wannabes wearing their caps backwards and listening to ipods.

I have no doubt that many (though not all) of the dealers are jaded with their mundane job in an unpleasant setting.

Of course lots of places fit that general category

Fast food places

Government buildings

Amusement park workers (you think turning on and off rides all day is good times?)

Many corporate jobs (Dilbert is popular for a reason)

Even in Skagway, Alaska when I was there once before the tourist season the people of the tiny town referred to the cruise ships as filled with FOPs (**cking Old People) even when those very FOPs are what kept their economy going, they generally hated them.

If you are going to base unrelated activities to jaded behavior then I suggest you never leave your house or apartment. Ever. Because based on that the world is going to be out to get you.

Welcome to paranoia.
Monteroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 09:07 AM   #4466
DMoogle
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DMoogle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern VA, USA
Posts: 7,138
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Question: Are there even any "riggedologists" that take PokErasmus seriously?
DMoogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 11:32 AM   #4467
K13
banned
 
K13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 531
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Its beyond pathetic.

KK vs K3

Can't even ****en win that preflop

next 99 < 98

like beyond ****en bull****

**** you to all the non rigged people

Not even 50% with QQ, KK vs Ax
K13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 11:35 AM   #4468
K13
banned
 
K13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 531
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

KK is automatic loss pre, and not to AA. So ****en bull****.

How the **** can you ten times in a row with it pre-flop? Why do these one in a million probabilites happen every single day. In less than a 1000 hands.

Why the **** am i even getting KK so many times in like 234 hands?
K13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 11:37 AM   #4469
AceCroupier
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 767
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by K13 View Post
KK is automatic loss pre, and not to AA. So ****en bull****.

How the **** can you ten times in a row with it pre-flop? Why do these one in a million probabilites happen every single day. In less than a 1000 hands.

Why the **** am i even getting KK so many times in like 234 hands?
How is the poker site benefiting from your loss any more than if you had won the hand?
AceCroupier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 11:42 AM   #4470
kitchma
journeyman
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: denial
Posts: 270
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by K13 View Post
KK is automatic loss pre, and not to AA. So ****en bull****.

How the **** can you ten times in a row with it pre-flop? Why do these one in a million probabilites happen every single day. In less than a 1000 hands.

Why the **** am i even getting KK so many times in like 234 hands?
Enough with your bu&&Sh*t recaps. Hand histories or shove it!
kitchma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 11:54 AM   #4471
K13
banned
 
K13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 531
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceCroupier View Post
How is the poker site benefiting from your loss any more than if you had won the hand?
Keeps the fish alive longer.

With so many hands an hour, people would be cleaned way faster than live poker.
K13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 12:40 PM   #4472
Markusgc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Markusgc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Noodles, Hockey & Punk Rock!
Posts: 8,788
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by K13 View Post
I just wonn 8 SNG's in a row
Quote:
Originally Posted by K13 View Post
Its hard to take this **** seriously. lol
I'll say!
Markusgc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 12:43 PM   #4473
AceCroupier
adept
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 767
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by K13 View Post
Keeps the fish alive longer.

With so many hands an hour, people would be cleaned way faster than live poker.
So are you saying that K3 should never beat KK or only when you are in the hand?

No matter how rigged or not rigged a site may be, K3 still has a 7.16% chance of beating KK. So if you played the hand 1000 times, you'd lose ~71 times. This was one of those times, get over it.
AceCroupier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 12:47 PM   #4474
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by K13 View Post
How the **** can you ten times in a row with it pre-flop? Why do these one in a million probabilites happen every single day. In less than a 1000 hands.
They don't. You are making it up.

You are an idiot.

Quote:
Why the **** am i even getting KK so many times in like 234 hands?
They aren't. You are making it up.

You are a mendacious idiot.


On behalf of the lizard people; have a nice day!
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2009, 01:11 PM   #4475
Monteroy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,093
Re: The great "Poker is rigged debate" - Collected threads edition

Is there any way to ban that K guy from this thread, all he does is post the same bad beat whines over and over as if KK can never lose ever. He would probably even be banned from the BBV section for needless zero content spamming.

If I thought he was doing this intentionally as a gimmick /troll I would not mind so much, but it is clear he is genuine in his selective cherry picking bad beat whining and probably will never give us an actual screen name which would show he cannot cut it at the $1 sit and gos he is playing.

He is also wasting valuable time that could be used by true riggedologists and their mafia controlled entropy theories.
Monteroy is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive