This. End of story.

You're not following me, probably because I wasn't being clear enough. What I was alluding to was the hyperlinks you were posting, which potentially could be beneficial to the site. Not likely, given the context, but still, better to just name the site without the full address if you think they're shady.

And as others have suggested, you should probably start by looking at your own game.

Can we all just use 'Perhabs' here as a private joke?

I don't think any one example is useful to anybody for our purposes here, but thanks for the illustration anyway.

Actually, this touches back on my thoery. Like you, I've tilted and played very badly from time to time, overcalling/betting bad pairs, chasing overpriced draws and such. Who hasn't? And why not right? The fish are always catching so why not me? And much to my surprise didn't I get rewarded for it far more often than expected! Yes, it happens, but it shouldn't happen that often! Still, if I'm rewarded 50% or 20% of the time, instead of 30% or 8% of the time, can I rely on that stratgey as sound? Of course not! But then I know a little about the math and it could be that the fish don't, or don't care so long as they figure it pays to overcall. They still lose, but much slower than expected - while each pot is raked. I, on the other hand, am run over far more often than expected and therefore can't win as much as I should or lose more than I should - while each pot is being raked.

I once thought the bad beat generator was attacking me specifically, or tight aggressive players like me. Why wouldn't they want me to loosen up, feed the rake and let the pots grow so the rake could be maxed out. Then I realized that I too was being rewarded for playing like a fish but that defied every +EV bone in my body. And, sure enough, I would lose a few buy-ins exactly as would be expected, though far more slowly that should have been given the ridiculously frequent suck-outs. That's when it occurred to me that this bad beat generator might be on all the time so as to alter the odds almost all of time, if only slightly, to keep the money in play longer to be rake away.

I explored some other theories I found online but many seemed quite insane indeed, and if you can't articulate atheory well enough to be understood it's either not plausible or you're not credible. However, I did find the notion of a 'doomswitch' intriguing.

The doomswich theroy postulates that there is some condition, or set of conditions, that triggers Pokersites to start robbing you. Maybe it's because you've had a hot streak that needs to be checked, or maybe your tight aggressive stlye stands to bust the fish. Whatever it is, the doomswitch is flipped and you're dead until they turn it off.

I suspect the programming logistics of a 'doomswitch' might make it infeasible and/or too easily detectible. Where would it reside? In the client? Some clever geek would almost certainly find traces of it there. Some suggest the doomswitch itself resides on the server and is triggered by certain configurations of registry keys on your computer. I don't know boo about that stuff, but my friends at Norton and Microsoft tell that's probably not possible, even with the Pokersite client constantly communicating with server. These theories suggest a variety of actions to frustrate, disable, or confuse the doomswitch and many mocked these strategies to hilarity.

I suspect something far simpler, either a 24/7 bad beat generator, altering the odds just enough to keep more money in play to be raked, or a plug-in program that can be plugged in or unplugged at some person's will and be easily removed should Pokersite ever have to give up the servers and programs to authorities. That's what I might do for $100 million more/year if I felt I could get away with it, or if it might still be profitable if I don't.

I'll remind everyone again that career white collar criminals almost never do jail time. The are typically only ever given a fine representing pennies on the dollar and a conviction that does not harm to their lifestyle or ability to start a similar or different scam tomorrow.

If you don't already know who owns Pokersite, do a little research. We now know who owned (and now owns) FT and other sites caught red handed cheating in some form or fashion; and we're shocked to learn of thier pre-existing criminal histories and affilations!? Why do you think the US DoJ charged all sites accomodating US under the RICO (organized crime) Act, among others, and call it a Ponzi scheme?

We now know very well who's running this show and we still give them our financial information and pray we're not being ripped off. We're all fish to them. FT is just the most recent example of how they've already spent our money.

You do realize that Ray Bitar has your credit card or bank information, right? Google him!

With all due respect, you haven't demonstrated that you know how often various hands should happen, and you haven't demonstrated that they happen to you more or less than expected, and by a statistically significant margin so that it is likely not random.

Well that's the biggest pile of steaming manure i've seen in quite some time.

I thought at first he was doing a fake crazy riggie routine, but he did write this thread

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/45...-stats-390723/


where he got mocked by the people in the Software forum.

The Software forum.

That post was nearly three years ago.


I would ask him what his thought of evil governments and 9/11, but I imagine he was too busy posting whiny bad beat stories then as well.

When people get concerned if online poker (or poker in general) will ever die, I simply point them to people like this guy who seems content to fund the poker economy for years with his only solace being a paranoid whine now and then.

Makes one feel good about the industry in a way.

That is a problem I don't know how to resolve.

No one hand will prove or disprove anything; nor will 6 or 100. If I disclosed all of my hand histories for the past two weeks (losing $400 of the $500 I built up from a $25 deposit in July) to someone with the appropriate expertise who reported a highly improbable recent losing streak you could still simply say, 'variance', and I couldn't argue. And then there's the permutation problem...are we looking at pre-flop probabilities, probabilities given one or more callers, probabilites given a particular flop, turn or river?

But you're still 300% up on your $25 July deposit, you say, that's awesome! How dare you complain! The last $100 will go the same way as always -$25, +$50, -$75, +$25, -$50, +$25, -$50 ; with the +'s hard earned and the -'s to morons and miracles.

The problem is the pattern. I've seen it on every Pokersite I've played before waking up and cashing out of sites five and six, after tripling or quadrupling my intial deposit, before the bad beat generator could take it all back. I tried to cash out of site 7 after quadrupling my inital deposit, including deposit bonus, but they kept stalling me (please try again later) for 2 months until I lost it all.

Same pattern, every time, every site. Almost always getting it in waaay best but losing to extreme fish drawing to gutters, runner runners, one or two outs. Is there another reasonable explanation for this pattern that I and so many others recognize?

Knowing what we now know about the online poker industry, there's really no where else to play and profit from early cash-outs.

I don't profess to be a great player, certainly not in the current environment, but I am firmly convinced I sould be +EV (as I am live), handily trapping the trappers. I often wonder where I'd be now if I'd just folded every AA and KK v all pre-flop shoves. I doubt I'd be here wasting precious table time.

I'd happily take every loss where I'm too big a pussy to 5 bet shove or call a 4bet pre, + every $ I got in bad, if I could only have 50% of my 70%s or better and not see a 'once in a lifetime' hand weekly while single tabling 10-20 hours/week.

Then please tell us why you waste you time

Want to see another interesting pattern - the quality of threads you create (over nearly 3 years), and a typical reply in each




Micro Stakes Forum:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/69...nking-1266472/



Bad Beats Forum:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54...-help-1265673/

This thread was locked so I cannot quote anyone, but safe to say the replies were not overly cuddly.





Coaching Forum:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/10...tting-1263148/



Software Forum:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/45...-stats-390723/





Which forums will you whine in next, perhaps the `Las Vegas Lifestyle` forum, or maybe the Pool, Snooker, and Billiards forum should be the next to experience your never changing paranoid approach to life in general.


By the way, what are your thoughts about 9/11?

All the best.

Well, if you want to form an opinion on this topic, maybe you should educate yourself on how to approach it. If you skim through this thread from the beginning there are quite a number of detailed posts about how to do this, from knowledgeable stats guys who due to frustration rarely post in this thread anymore. Keep an eye out for Spadebidder's in particular, but there are others. They are easy to spot.

The fact that you think even two weeks of hands is sufficient to get reliable results suggests that you have a lot to learn.

Or get someone who is knowledgeable about this to analyse your entire handhistories.

The thing is - for people who know what they're doing, they don't just simply say "variance" they can show you with calculations where your results fit in the normal expected curve. If your results are more than 4 standard deviations off from expectation, it is a good indication of something worth looking into further, from what I understand. Then other people can do the same analysis to see whether they get similar results or whether you just are an outlier. You might be surprised to find out that your results aren't really that abnormal - you just remember the bad beats you get and forget about the ones you give.

Being curious is fine. But if you're going to complain, do your homework.

But you don't really know if you are seeing such patterns. The fact is, we evolved to spot snakes in the grass, or recognize faces. We didn't evolve to do complex statistics in our heads. We are pattern recognizing creatures. This helps us when wandering through the jungle, but when it comes to numbers it leads us to often see patterns that may not really be there. The good news is there are ways to verify, and see if you've spotted something real or not.

That's the question - do you want to approach it using gut instinct or really figure out if there is a problem?

If you used a tracking program like PT or HEM you could find out in an instant whether you are profitable with those hands and how much you'd be giving up or gaining by always folding them.

The reality is you have no idea how many of your 70%rs you're actually hitting.

But don't take my word for it. You can test it yourself. For the next 500 hands keep track like you usually do of how many you're missing. Then go back over the hand histories and see how accurate you were. The results may surprise you.

I believe you.

Since the server knows you don't deposit, why not instead let you take some of the sharks $ so that you may become a regular rake payer?

I wonder why the Bacardi riggie decided to post that wall of text under a new account?

Perhaps he subconsciously pre-empted that it was a heap of garbage so his mind told him 'you better do this under an alias'?

YouRaise/3ozBacardi - your speak of slots and supermarkets is just drivel. The supermarket part is just completely irrelevant. That's just how companies run there businesses to maximise profits. If you have a problem with that then you need to go to an ethics forum somewhere because it really has no place in this thread.

Ok slots is also gambling and what you say is probably true in the most part about carpets blah blah blah. However, how many people have forged decade long careers playing slots? There might be someone out there... There is a whole forum here full of long term winning players who rode the variance waves month on month, year on year, and fully grasped that everything is working as it should.

If it is rigged then by jove we should all count ourselves extremely lucky because it would appear according to your theories that we are hand picked and chosen to win.....by every site....

FYP.

Don't trouble yourself to post thanks.

Banned because I posted unwanted stuff... Stupid me I thought is a debate.
Ahhahhahaha! What do you expect from those who advertise for merge and party? Watchdogs for the skunks of all skunks from the networks.

I am not Bacardi or that user, If I would be Bacardi I would have said, i am NOT a coward... or you think only one man think online poker is a smelly business.

I have posted that just to bring some light in your square heads... to show you all is about Benjamins, not skill and luck and play in position. That work only if server want to work.

I did not even think, things are so bad... I was very steaming after some bad beats, and bad streaks...but ban me.

Ban me again, now even I know I gave you a reason scumbags!

We're trying to debate whether poker is rigged, or not. Supermarkets and slots have nothing to do with this thread hence the tidying. I understand why you can relate these things quite easily in a vacuum though so don't be mad!

Keep making new accounts, never let them silence you from telling the truth.

Obviously if they banned you it was because you were close to giving away the real secrets, so double down on whatever your brilliant theory is because it has to be right!

Just curious peoples thoughts on what site has the most randomized cards and best shuffle system? Full tilt was the best for me i was god mode on that site. to bad i am an american. poker stars i never cared for and cake is ok. Merge is probably the worst for me. I run bad against every single opponent i play.
I gotta go with full tilt and i liked mint poker before they shut down. What was cool about mint poker you could change the dealer.

I heard NoBadBeatPoker is not bad, RunLikeGod and NeverLoseAflip.com as well.

and people say the games are no longer profitable...

I heard Stars uses a double randomizer method which in effect randomizes cards and then re-randomizes them. So basically you are getting a 2 for the price of one.

The most randomised? so that's even more random than random?

Oops, you started a new thread. What you were looking for is the "Poker is Rigged" thread, where you can exchange "ideas" with all the other rigtards.

lol