Ask him how good a player he thinks he is. More fun to let them spin themselves.

I presume this is sarcasm.

Or do you really believe that you can rig things so that it has a noticeable effect for 'idiots' without it becoming screamingly obvious to those who actually know how to play poker that they are financing the site's largesse to the fish.

22.5 BB/100 is not to be sneezed at.

In fact, even considering the 'rigged' site, I'm sure a there are a few people lurking about who would be happy with his 8 BB/100.

Multi-level thinking FTW.

I appreciate you making an effort to give a direct answer but the second part of my question was to find out how you arrived at those percentages rather than why it happens.

Obviously I cannot give straight numbers, because it's a a guess based on the idea of usually 1-2 idiots per 9 man table.

Percent of regulars/addicts could also be way smaller, just enough to feed the pool of 15% idiots, to have least amount of players complaining if they notice they are set up.

So potentially there could be rather small percent of people who are rigged, and the rest of normal people make fun of us because their play is normal :P

I don't have these numbers, but stars does

It is screamingly obvious to so many people wiki. There are thousands of people that believe it is rigged. Most of my poker playing friends in the non virtual world believe it is rigged as well. The 5 of you can come on this forum and defend online poker all day every day, but you won't convince the players that are experiencing the rig. It must be nice to play online poker and run in-line with the odds -- I remember those days. But you must understand, the deck does not run fair for a large amount of players out there, you just aren't one of them.
Here is an update on my study btw:

Pair over pair: 17 wins, 6 losses (less than 3-1, should be greater than 4-1)
Pair under pair: 3 wins, 10 losses
Dominating hand: 40 wins, 21 losses (less than 2-1, should be close to 3-1)
Dominated hand: 11 wins, 19 losses (greater than 1-2, should be close to 1-3)
Pair vs O+U : 14 wins, 12 losses (close to 1-1, should be close to 2.5-1)
O+U vs pair: 3 wins, 10 losses (less than 1-3, should be close to 1-2.5)
Race: 42 wins, 50 losses ( should be close to 1-1)

The evidence is getting close to being pretty damning in my case. I encourage anyone who thinks the odds are skewed to do the same study.

So you've gone from a prediction of 75% rigged accounts to "could be a rather small perecent" already.

Pretty damning? You're the guy who felt the need to mention he did some stats at Uni, right? Wakeup! It's time to shine

If they rigged almost everyone, the marginal of "scammed percentages" would need to be very small, and pretty much undetectable, maybe they would prefer that instead of smaller amount of players, and bigger percentage that gets dealt to idiots.

It's fun that stars dont want a bad beat jackpot.

They feel sorry for the people that would get abused by good players on there.

Since when did stars give a **** about bad players losing?

That is an incredibly small sample size to say the least.

For me to believe anyone that online poker is rigged I would like to see a math class , college , or someone smarter in math than myself to observe 30,000+ hands..... then you will have evidence.

Your showing me a insanely small sample size and saying it must be rigged.

Thats like saying in a baseball series if a team sweeps the other team it must be rigged , certainly the other team must win a game..... wrong !

anything can happen in a small sample size , if you go to a craps table and roll snake eyes that is about the same odds of a lower pair in the hole beating a larger one.

Now take 1 table and roll the dice 10 times .... if you rolled 3 snake eyes in a row during this period would it be rigged? of course its inconclusive not enough data.

Now roll the dice 20,000+ times ..... if you roll snake eyes a huge percent of the time then you may have something to work with.

People have had huuuuuuuge hand histories gone over by great mathmaticians and never once has there been anything damning online poker being rigged. If you are a losing player thinking its " rigged " pick up a poker book , read it a few times and try again.

Maybe you will start to believe its rigged in your favor =)

Well, at least you are trying to put together some evidence. So taking into account your sample size and assuming that you haven't left out any hands and calculated correctly (ie: pf all in rather than getting it in later on), what about these results leads you to conclude that your results are so outside of expectation that rigging is the most likely option?

The funniest most ironic thing I find is that most these people screaming online poker is " rigged " are the same ones to deposit again , lose and once again complain.

If its rigged why do you continue to play ?

Have you ever thought for once .... maybe there are leaks in your game you need to fix?
Better bankroll management so you can withstand bad runs?

he won money at poker 6 years ago but doesnt anymore

I happen to know for a fact the jews who own the world are rigging OLP to develop energy weapons and thought control devices. Flame me if you must.

LOL. They arent going to lose any players because of manipulating the deal. These online sites have been rigging the deal since day one. Players are to addicted or naive to quit playing, (most anyway).

thank you for quoting that br... i somehow didnt see it before... that post is so full of win lol

what is that site that analyzes variance of poker sites? i saw there that the underdog winning was only 1.8 standard deviations higher than expected on bovada. "just under" the mark of 2 SD's that would warrant concern. what a coincedence!

yes last post was just meant for humor, inspired by that one spammer guy from doj facebook page after black friday. sorry if i offended any1

The people who argue that online poker is honest seem to fall into three categories.

1. Gullible/naive.
These types of people have been exploited in scams since time began. They really are innocent enough to accept online poker companies' claims at face value.

2. The 'Committed Bunch'.
These people have been playing online poker for years. They have invested a significant amount of time and money. They have probably lost quite a bit of this money overall, but have picked up a few nice wins along the way. They don't want to admit they are overall losers and they don't want to admit being taken in by manipulated software. They have shown a commitment to online poker and can't admit they have been wrong.

3. Online poker employees.
These people sign up to poker forums without declaring who they are. They pose as ordinary players and slam anyone who criticises online poker while claiming to be big overall winners themselves. Their job is to stop 'mug punters' quitting the game.

Really no reason for that. Like all the others you mentioned, you either have the common sense to realize its rigged or you dont.

HOOOLIGAN;

Try this as an experiment if nothing else.
A few years back I had two accts. on PS. The first one I couldnt win to save my life. No hook-ups nothing to work with at all. The second acct. was great. Was dealt many good hands, won tourneys. I screwed myself by cashing out a few times to netteller when U.S. players could do that. After the cash outs of course the software kicks in to get that profit back.
Anyway, set up a second acct. Use a different payment type, different e-mail, etc. See what happens. If you get the newbie hook-up, run it up, cash out and stay out.
Report back.

so you figured out a way to exploit the rig over 5 years ago (thats when neteller left the US market) and yet somehow you are not a millionaire yet by exploiting the obvious rig by getting a ton of accounts with the "new player hookup"?

Don't call it an "incredibly small" sample size, because it isn't. But I do agree that it is too small. As I said, these are my results to date. It has taken a good amount of hands to come up with the numbers that I have thus far. I don't have near enough pair over pair scenarios. The dominating hand category is getting there. I am very interested to see where it is in 50-100 more hands. This category is very suspicious, along with the pair vs over+under category. It doesn't take a huge sample like you claim to prove something is off. You can prove a 50/50 coin is rigged with 100 flips, it just has to be very off. But that is a 50/50 scenario. When you have something like an 80/20, 75/25, or 70/30, your sample size does not need to be nearly as large to have statistical confidence that a rig is occurring.

Look at the first post. You might find yourself in one of those category if you want to be honest.
Bad Beat, might want to add #4. Addicted to the OLP scam. Will stop no matter what.

Made about $20,000 doing that. This cant be done bu U.S. players anymore.