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.

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.

stars has more coolers for me today

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?

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.

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.

per capita bad beats imo

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.

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.

The casino will have footage of this event, but you are not allowed to see it.

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

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 !

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!

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.

Question: Are there even any "riggedologists" that take PokErasmus seriously?

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

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?

Enough with your bu&&Sh*t recaps. Hand histories or shove it!

Keeps the fish alive longer.

With so many hands an hour, people would be cleaned way faster than live poker.

I'll say!

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.

They don't. You are making it up.

You are an idiot.

They aren't. You are making it up.

You are a mendacious idiot.


On behalf of the lizard people; have a nice day!

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.