Just ask the Guys at your Table or post your plays on here , they will let you know....

A surefire sign would be if you catch yourself thinking it's rigged.

Wait for ittttttt!

Oh no I bet they busted your AA or AAS , either way completely rigged along with Ultimate Bet......

Also if you want to make living playing poker you need to spend an inordinate amount of time on this riggie forum trying to make riggies prove why they assume poker rigged . Then you can tell them they are idiots and that you make a living playing poker so how can it be rigged. All the while somewhere you will still have time to have a life and read and dispute eveything they say , and pretend that it really matters that a riggie cant tell them how the rig works ......Oh and I have a bridge for sale are you interested..

Huh Sinistermonster newbie dissapeared from thread

Can anybody please explain to me how that happened ?

He was spamming all over the place in order to inflate his post count so he could post in the transfers thread.

Hi Stork,

Sorry I'm PMing you, I know you prefer email but gmail is down.

Be careful in the rigged thread, man, you're slipping from passing-veneer-of-respectability to common troll and you are SO much better at playing the former.

Go, take a walk outside. Breathe. Maybe go for a job or a swim if that's your thing. I remember you saying that you liked to swim. Come back in a few hours, make a few content-free posts until people stop being interested then drop another scrap of bait to bring 'em back.

And don't be afraid to get ridiculous. You pull it off brilliantly sometimes but then there's days like today when you lose sight of it. That bit about the rig always favoring the short stack when three players get AI? C'mon man, that was awesome! If an example of it not happening is provided there's nothing forcing you to acknowledge it. That generates lots of discussion and opens up even more opportunities for you to take the riggie pole position.

And we need you, Stork, the shills need you. Don't forget that. We both know that the rig exists but the people that send us checks need you to make the people who claim a rig exists look just as ethically bankrupt as we are.

Sincerely,
quux

One of the very first post I made ITT was about this entire issue surrounding a "rig" stems from online poker not being the same game or not being a true emulation of live/real poker, that it's claimed to be. It is not disputed that different poker sites/networks use different types of RNGs or card distribution. So everything else aside for the moment, doesn't that fact alone prove that people are not delusional when they notice different card distribution at different sites and in relation to live/real deal poker?

I have read people state ITT that even though different sites/networks utilize different RNGs/card distribution it's irrelevant because the result is they equate to a random unpredictable deal. If that's the case then why are there different RNGs/card distribution, a placebo for potential buyers to think their different?

In online poker I would think most players go into it with the presumption all card distribution online is the same as each other and as a live deal. That would seem to be a plausible explanation for the naked eye anomalies "riggies" report experiencing, that don't show up in stats, in relation to a "rig" or bias in the software. The cards are being distributed perceivably different at different sites but as far as we know unpredictably.

None of this is new info and I don't endeavor to suddenly "prove a rig" but I will bring this back specifically on topic. The first thing people will say to a "riggie" is "a rig would show up in the stats", which I presume means over a large enough sample there would be a measurable deviation from that of a live poker deal. However since online poker is not using a physical 52 card deck card distribution and different online poker sites/networks are not using the same virtual card distribution, why are live deal statistics considered a catchall for uncovering a "rig" in online poker?

ORly.gif?

Even the shoddiest pseudo-RNG available today would not make a discernible difference to the card distribution in a poker game, as the magnitude of randomness they produce is astronomically greater than what is necessary to deal a deck of cards unpredictably and without patterns. And the better sites of course use true RNGs anyway.

This has nothing to do with any argument that sites might rig the deal, which I'm not engaging in. Just pointing out the absolute nonsense of your statement about RNGs.

Did you accidentally bold the wrong part or something?

It is not disputed that different poker sites/networks use different types of RNGs or card distribution.

So it is disputed that different poker sites/networks use different types of RNGs or card distribution? Are you you arguing semantics since I didn't state "some different poker sites/networks..."? I'm not understanding what you find nonsensical about that statement.

The ridiculous things you said were that it isn't disputed that different networks have different card distributions, and that the reason is they use different RNGs. Both the premise and the conclusion of that statement are wrong to the point of absurdity. There is no such consensus, and even if there were it wouldn't be because of different RNGs.

What's absurd, ridiculous and nonsensical is that you feel compelled to use that terminology in reference to what seems to be a misunderstanding. Oh well.

Pretty sure you guys don't mean the same thing by "card distribution". I think that Thinking Out Loud means the method (algorithm, hardware package, whatever) by which the site deals "cards" and NewOldGuy means something like a probability distribution (click for explanation).


Either of you, please feel free to correct me if I am not explaining what you meant correctly.

That said ...... if the probability distribution is the same, then I am pretty certain I am correct in saying that it doesn't matter how the RNG/hardware/whatever works to generate the "cards".

What do you think is the difference between

A - a random, unpredictable deal, and
B - a random, unpredictable deal?

Also if a measurable deviation would only become noticeable after say a 1bn hands sample, neither would it be clearly visible by guys with very limited poker knowledge, nor would it be accountable for their continuous losses.

They aren't. It's about math and probability, and they're just coincidentally showing the same results for both live and online.

I believe you are mistaken about what he actually said and correct about what I meant. He claimed that people notice different card distributions on different networks, clearly meaning the deal output was discernibly different, and he attributed this to different RNGs in use. He even further clarified that it was noticeably different than a live deal.

And he said this wasn't in dispute, like it was accepted common knowledge. It is neither, except with fringe riggies.

TOL,

While there are certainly different RNGs in use, you seem to be under the mistaken belief that there are different "flavours" of random. This is not the case. A sequence of numbers is either random or it isn't. That is, there are only two states "random" and "not random" (or in the case of a poker site "random" and "broken"). It's like being pregnant. There's no "sorta random" or "this random is more random than that random".

Moreover, the idea that a non-random deal could be detectable by a human being but NOT by statistical analysis is patently absurd. Any "pattern" than can be recognized by a human being can certainly be seen in any database - You just need to describe it.

Name one other thing in the universe that can only be "seen" by a human being but can't be measured objectively?


As far as online RNG vs live poker, then it depends what you mean. If you're playing at a casino with a Shuffle Master, then you're still talking about an RNG. Or do you think Shuffle Master has somehow created the only RNG that successfully mimics a "real" shuffle?

If you're talking about live hand shuffle, then yes there may well be a difference between live and online - A live hand shuffle is fairly likely to be non-random. Particularly with non-professional dealers, home games and self-shuffled games.

It's big because it's old and constantly has fresh threads dumped into it, along with having regular posters that have back and forth arguments.

The HS threads in NVG would have this thread crushed if they didn't get closed every month, and I'm sure there are plenty of other threads that would also beat out this one.

Eh, it's not quite as simple as that. Unless a computer is gathering data from a physical phenomenon like a radioactive source or atmospheric noise, it's not truly random (which is why most random number generators are called "pseudo-random"). I'd be willing to bet that there are plenty of poker sites which don't do this. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that there are plenty of poker sites for which it's not possible to encounter all 52! shuffles. Assuming it seeds at the beginning of a hand, it would take a 226-bit seed to encounter all shuffles. Many operating systems don't have random-number generators that use seeds that large.

Yes it is.

Like I said, broken.

Define "plenty" (it's also pretty meaningless if they're sites nobody actually plays on) and post how much you're willing to bet. Escrow required since I have no idea who you are.

And how exactly are you going to confirm? You planning on getting a dozen different poker sites to tell you what their shuffling algorithm is, and how they're generating their seed?

While true, it's irrelevent. Only a tiny fraction of the 52! decks will be dealt before the universe burns out, and the capability to do so is not a necessary condition for a fair shuffle. Seed size is a condition of security against brute force cracking, not a condition for randomness.
A random deck is one in which each card has equal chance to appear in any deck position. That is easily done with a pRNG.

Yes some sites do use true hardware RNGs. But the use of one or not has no bearing on either the fairness of the game or on observable card distribution differences. Sites who want to cheat would still use a fair RNG, and just not always deal those cards.

I disagree. If I arrange the cards in order from A-K, by suits, and make one single random cut, then each card has a 1/52 chance of appearing in any deck position. That's not a random deck
I agree. But I doubt they all do (it's already been proven that some sites in the past didn't, in fact).

Exactly. My point being IF there is no difference in how the everything plays out regardless of the "deal" why even bother to have different types? Either they are all the exact same or not, I don't see how anyone can claim x RNG is more random than a physical 52 card deck or another RNG, while claiming they both do the exact same thing. There has to be some quantifiable difference in them for the latter claim to be true, which disproves the former claim. I can understand the claim that they all create an unpredictable result but there has to be a difference in them somewhere that causes one to do something different than another.

For example, from what I understand a quartz clock is not as accurate as an atomic clock, even though both are capable of tracking time, so they behave differently and presumably there will be occurrences where the quartz clock is "off" or skewed from that of the atomic clock.

Likewise in online poker if one "deal" is admittedly different than another there has to be some cause and effect that happens. I'm postulating that the effect could be perceivable and is what "riggies" notice. There are some sites that have a continuous shuffle and others where there is just the initial shuffle, if this were true of live deal poker what would be the effect? If a player went to one casino where they shuffled the deck once each hand and then another where they continually shuffled cards the entire hand would there be any noticeable difference in the two, outside of the shuffle?

I have seen Josem post about this so hopefully he can expound as to why he believes the type of "deal" even matters online, if they all are the same.