Don't be silly, he only does it when he has a hand he feels is strong.

He does it randomly, like this:

Care to clarify this utterly confusing statement???

No. Good try though. Next???

He is Herman Cain, obviously.

You probably realized by now youre not going to get an honest answer from these affiliates, promoters, ignorants, etc. that clog this thread.
Use your common sense. The deal is obviously manipulated. Same as every other site.
I tried everleaf network a while ago since it was new and I would be in the "new player" status there. Won a fairly decent amount of money, processed a couple of cash outs, too. Soon after that, couldnt come out ahead to save my life. Just like you were explaining, crazy suck out after suck out. Only winning hand might be taking a small blind!? Of course, losing hands after suck out, large.
Just go with your good judgement. What you see, is what you see! No reason to play on rigged internet games.

If your theory was just as simple as "bad players win", then you could print yourself money by playing bad hands.

Your theory seems to be that bad players only win more often than they should, and you specifically pointed out that most of them are Italian, so you can't take advantage of the rig, even though you could easily see it.

Now then, care to answer my question:

Btw, Bingo_Boy...I just realized you were the smug guy who responded to my earlier post, highlighting where I said I was an "excellent, winning hold em player" and responding with "Lol". That's your argument? Do you know me? I have averaged $5k/month profit on other sites and have an ROI over 100% in MTT play on each of the other sites I've played on. To me, that makes me a pretty good player...and you not knowing me from Adam, that makes you look pretty stupid to pick that out and respond that way. Yes I win at a very comfortable rate on other sites...No, I do NOT at Minted and don't believe I ever could.

screen names? graphs? anything for proof?

I am not a wizard with poker data software (I have never played poker with the use of HUD's and probably never will...I'd prefer them banned during play), and don't believe there is even a function within them to quantify "how much more often". I would in fact LOVE for people with this knowledge to pool their data if there is some sort of way of quantifying. I DO have the data of my winnings/losses on the site vs. other sites at this point, and being a long-time player you have a sense of what should and should not happen that often.

I am attempting to do more research on poker software and such, because I would love to have that type of statistical resolution to this. The most compelling argument I can give at this point is that I am a steady healthy winner at other sites that feature much much better competition, and have one hell of a time ever winning a hand where I am ahead on Minted...In fact, the times I am able to win on Minted is when I "got it in bad". Also, I'm still waiting for players to show me where they are bigger winners at Minted than other sites (which should be easy enough to show), which I believe should be the norm given the incompetent competition.

It doesn't appear that I can insert a picture without hosting it somewhere on a URL...But if you do a MTT/Scheduled search on Sharkscope for Joydivision81 on Merge, you will see what I'm getting at.

try the snipping tool - oops! don't think that will work because of the hosting that you refer to. Sorry!

Well obviously there isn't just a button to do it, but you can pretty easily filter for situations you think happen too often and compare them between sites. What kind of data? Depending on how thorough it is, you could post that and have people look it over.

EDIT: Sharkscope graphs aren't the best for this type of thing, where you think there are reasons you're being cheated or what have you.

My next guess is that is also a lie. I could ask you to back up your statement that all winning players are running bad but there is no point really, is there?

I was the smug guy? For laughing at you for twice calling yourself an excellent player in one post? Good one.

Perhaps instead of picking on that you could have responded to my other responses to your post. Namely:

I.e. This is not your bad beat blog and if what you are claiming is true feel free to prove it so we can get the scumbags shut down.

Well, you're not alone among riggies for not having any idea how to actually figure out if there is likely a rig going on but believing there is one anyway, but you should recognize that learning what is statistically "normal" and how far away from normal one should be before suspecting a rig is the place to begin.

As I said, I am not real familiar with what the software is capable of...What I would like to look at is how often draws are getting there, how often certain types of suckouts occur, etc. I know there is a site that has done tests on many of the major sites for stuff like this...I emailed them and they said they are unable to run these tests on Everleaf network because the data "is not tracked by hand history providers".

Exactly correct...I would love to see this type of analysis done. I understand variance, standard deviation, etc and believe this falls outside of that.

Fair enough. A few questions:

1) what are you measuring specifically that falls outside of variance, etc?
2) how often should it happen at expectation?
3) how often is it happening for you? Based on what sample size?
4) how many standard deviations off of expectation are your results?

Look...If you have done very well at other sites and have played long enough to know what to expect from a fair poker site...and then go to a new site and can't believe how poorly people play but for some reason you get your butt kicked for 4 months straight...and you see the craziest things imaginable consistently...Then you start to wonder. That is my situation. I am pointing out what I have seen and would love to quantitatively answer the questions you are asking. I would absolutely think that good experienced players who have played at Minted for awhile would be seeing the same things and start to question it. I would love to analyze any data available, and as I mentioned I am not super familiar with poker data software. If there is a way for people to pool hand histories or something and look at some things, that would be great...and if I am wrong, that is just 100% fine with me. But based on what I have seen on that site, I absolutely believe something is amiss.

Look for the Everleaf/Minted regs threads. See what some of those posters say, and let us know if you feel like it.

As someone who is not real familiar with poker software and hand history data...what I am going on so far is this (granted much of it is not as hard-data based as I would like...I would love some help with that part):

* I have won consistently at other sites, but have lost for 4 months straight on Minted. You know the little Shark and Star icons on Sharkscope for top players? I have those. But on Minted, I have lost every dollar, getting it in good over and over and over again to little avail.

* I have witnessed a truly inordinate amount of gruesome suckouts which should only occur at the relevant percentage of the time (i.e 2 outer on the river should be 5% of the time)

* The foreign players on Minted/everleaf play as if they aren't even familiar with basic poker concepts. Thus, good players should be winning at an even HIGHER rate on this site, but most of what I've heard from 2+2ers and those on the site are that while they win, they do so at a lesser rate than other sites. This makes NO sense.

So, to answer your question....

1) The percentage of suckouts and made draws vs. what should be...that seems to be a big part of the issue. Also, I am still waiting for at least a couple good players to show me that they are winning at a better rate on Minted, which should be easy enough. This would have to be expected if this site is on the level...softest competition in the world.

2) Suckouts etc, easy enough to figure how often specific things should happen I would think...

3) I would like to figure out how to get that data, rather than going off observation

4) Yes, is the absurdity I've experienced within possible variance or no? That is the question.

You're currently complaining about minted but I see you have also complained about Fulltilt being dodgy because you couldn't win there. From Feb last year:


Are Merge SNGs rigged too?

How rigged was Pokerstars?

How likely do you think it is that you just ran godlike in Merge MTTs?

Tell us, affiliate or total ignorance?

I indeed ran very badly on FullTilt at first and posted my frustrations...including that I assumed this was due to variance, if you read the post. I was very frustrated at that point, and to be honest I don't think I appreciated quite how bad you can run within natural variance. I do not think Full Tilt was rigged and I ended up achieving a higher MTT ROI on Full Tilt than on Merge, so no I don't think I simply ran godlike on Merge.

Instead of being combative, try being helpful. I am honestly saying what I have experienced on Minted and that I would love to figure out how to analyze some data to back it up...If I didn't think actual data would support what I'm saying, I wouldn't be trying to do that kind of analysis, would I???

I think the random word generator for your tedious posts is rigged. Dreamer hasn't appeared for ages now. I demand an analysis of the output by an independent American Government controlled adjudicator.