He posts a lot in the forums, he just lacks the ability to process advice because he is too distracted by his inaccurate belief of his skills and his paranoid personality. He always responds to genuine advice with a theoretical trying to prove his beliefs are actually correct.

Perhaps in time if he actually learns the game he will look back and laugh at how blatantly newbieish his approach to the game is for now, but odds are he will not change too much, and I certainly hope he chooses to stay on his current path.

I usually tell riggies to quit poker, and while certainly that is the correct choice for him, I strongly advise that he keeps grinding the 2/4 cent games on 888 which he believes caps his winnings and is rigged.

Really wish I could find that funny video I was talking about, it really was a clone of this dude.

Meh, it felt like 5 million...

Hey guys

One question. Why I should believe that online poker is random after I played 12k one table SNG on PS and Poker770 and I am total of 185 BI under EV? Buyins where from 3.5$ to 11$, avg buyin was around 6$. I was still a winner with 7% ROI. But man, its like u are playing with magicans.
Only answer that I do not want to hear is that this is not a big enough sample. Because its about 1.2million hands.

Gl all

Occam's razor suggests that a simple explanation is to be preferred to a complicated one.

1. Poker is a game with an element of chance
2. Results of games with an element of chance are influenced by variance
3. Your results are well within the bounds of normal variance

So if 3. is true, why should anyone believe that it is rigged?

Yeah, I was thinking I might've found a r/f here. Better spots would likely emerge.

Being down 185 buy-ins is totally within any statistical norm over a 12,000 sample size.

Go here and play with this tourney variance simulator: http://pokerdope.com/tournament-variance-calculator/

Winning 160 BBs in 3 hours of live play seems like a completely realistic sustainable winrate.

For about the last 15k or so of those hands, the difference between all-in EV and green lines has stayed about the same, which is exactly what you would expect.

Let's say you had 10 coin flips and 7 came up heads. After those 10, you will flip the coin 1,000 more times, for a total of 1,010 times. The expected outcome of all 1,010 times is 507 heads and 503 tails, with over and under 507 both equally likely.

There is no magical way that the all-in EV line will bounce back and you are not due for a few suck-outs. The difference between the green and the all-in EV line, once it happens, is expected to continue until infinity.

However, you do have a larger sample size even if the the difference between all-in EV and green lines remains the same. In the heads example, 7 out of 10 heads and one could say the coin could be rigged. With 507 out of 1010 coming up heads, it's very hard to say the coin is rigged.

For 750 BB's being the difference, how many BB's total have been at stake in all-in pots? 38k hands, with 1 out of 100 hands being all-in and 100 BB's at stake in each one, that's 38k BB's (Yes, I'm essentially making these numbers up). 750/38k comes out to 2%.

In the coin flip example above, I did 1,010 cells with Excel's Rand function, reading either 0 or 1 with equal likelihood. I got 478 "heads." The difference of 27 between actual and expected is 2.6%.

That is not expected or the point. We can only play weekends here so it will take longer to get to a lower level. The thing is , I rarely get rusults like this online and even when I do , I go on prolonged downswings at an unrealistic pace. The guy who said that 888 was equalizing him at $100. may not just be playing bad . If I win an MTT on there I find it dificult to get back any sort of money (Result) until most has been returned to them... The cards then become fairer..

You mean there is a lot of variance in MTTs. No **** Sherlock

Thx. Only dnt know what is the difference between Number and Sample size? Isnt this the same?

The variance would be acceptable if it went both ways.Although I am able to win MTT s I am not able to build a bankroll in the + anywhere near the - over the years . The variance is the site rigging the RNG in their favor. Like that 66 guy says they have a line they let you stay around even or slightly ahead for a short time. You cant tell me a winning MTT player at both live and online moves up and down with acceptable variance live. But Online only sees slightly up or way down variance over many years. They are crooks that play with the Program online. The hands I see for a long time after winning a MTT are so ridiculously biased that Phil Ivey would go broke. The program has been proven rigged by that but is well masked on paper so they never get caught. They hold all the cards so to speak. Anyway it does not matter to me anymore as I will only play online with playmoney for the rest of my days. good luck to you...

Then stop tracking your hands in notebooks like a serial killer does and fire up PT4/HEM and shut the crooks down. Oh, ok. That makes perfect sense. Yes, just like you've repeatedly been done with this thread only to return posting in it 15 minutes later.

If you can't manage to follow through with what you say, try just not saying anything in the future.

Wait, Freddie, didn't you exploit the rig for a consistent $20/day - what's like $500 a month? I thought you quit because you got bored, not because of 'prolonged downswings' you all of a sudden whine about. How come you tell a totally different story now?

how about no

Too dumb to use an odds calculator yourself? Who'd have thought...

Your 'generous' 5% estimate made me lol though, HTH.

In something like this you don't want to measure the difference in %, you want to measure it in standard deviations, because that considers the sample size in the calculation. In this example, your result was just under 2 SD from the mean. the SD here is about 16. Your result, or worse, will happen about 5% of the time.

So you think the site wins when you lose, and not another player?

So by your theory, there would have to be many players slightly up, and a much smaller number of players way down. But in reality we know that less than half of players are up lifetime online, more like a quarter to a third.

Can the BBV posts please be banned from here?

I am talking about myself not all the players . After playing MTTs for years and being in the + Live and - online in a very urealistic way. I had to conclude that online poker is rigged. The players that are allowed to beat you are re depositing donks that will lose it all in other games. This is widespread and obvious, the reason as I have stated in the past is to keep them winning often enough to become hooked on poker and believe that they can play. It is the way online operators maximize profits. The more players kept in the game longer means more rake. If I won online at the same rate I do live , I would have discouraged and eliminated hundreds of players that continue to contribute to the rake. This goes for lots and lots of the better players who struggle online and see the ridiculous hand draws given to bad callers . Thats why you see so many complaints . If I lost at live poker I would believe you that it is my game that needs upgraded , but that is bunk. My game is solid but there is something amiss with online poker..

This guy just wants people to look at his boring bad beats.

Please make it stop! I have to look at my own bad beats daily.

What do you mean BBV? PokerPlayer66 butchered the two hands he just posted and deserved to get screwed.

More questions to dodge: How aren't you banned from all live casinos yet, given how much you must be hurting their business? How don't the tables break as soon as you sit anyway?

These are rhetorical though, for obvious reasons, unlike the previous one. Care to explain?


+1 to PP66 and Full****** being too annoyingly dumb even for this thread's standards, fwiw. /2c

6max is especially rigged.

My winrate at 6max: 1.75bb/100.

All in EV winrate at 6max: 12.1bb/100.

Let's have fun and analyze how you played this fine hand.


You got dealt a premium hand! You are entitled to win it. Your plan? You have AQ so you should win! Who needs to think more then that when you get dealt a top 10% hand.


A power raise to 16 cents ( oops I mean 4 BB). Shockingly this does not get folds, almost as if people have no respect for the extra 12 cents they need to invest to see a flop.

What was your plan this hand? It was to win because you feel you have the best hand pre-flop.

What range of hands would these guys call your raise? Who cares! You have AQ after all.

Will you care about building an awkward size pot (in terms of BB) out of position to one of the two loose players with AQo? Nah, you have AQ so you should win! Why worry about what you will do on later streets since you have a monster.


Not the best flop, but you were dealt AQ preflop so who cares about what the flop is, or what your opponents might have, and since you showed aggression you will follow it up with , um, calling I guess with your nut pair draw. Who cares what the guy who is betting might have anyway, you have AQ!

What is the plan on later streets? Who cares, you still have AQ! No doubt though if you hit your top pair draw you will pounce and make them pay!

Bingo! You hit your top pair draw!!! Look at that horrid tiny bet by the SB, you will make him (and potentially the other player) pay by, um, calling I guess?

I know, you were "trapping" and hoping the other player would raise or something. He folded, but that is fine because now you will make your opponent pay on the river or something! WHo cares anyway, you have AQ that got to be a top pair so parades are currently being planned in your honor.


What is going on here! It is as if the opponent did not respect and fold to your call on the turn. He is betting big, and of course everyone knows that when weak players do this betting line (small , small, big) they have what they believe to be the nuts on the river, so the odds are that the river improved his hand, but who cares since you were dealt AQ and got top pair on the turn, you are entitled to win this hand, what the opponent may have does not matter at all.

No shock it did improve his hand. One of the common approaches players take with marginal or drawing hands vs calling station donks is bet small until you improve then bet big, but you were probably just creating a fake table image by being that type of donk, or something.

Anyway, you got dealt AQ preflop and were entitled to win that hand (in your mind) by your aggressive calling on every street post flop, so to triple merge your range you call again on the river and when the opponent shows with a better hand (after you never put him in a position to need to fold post flop by raising) you screamed how rigged it was since you played it perfect!

I like how the opponent bet 10 BB when up to that point both of you had only put in 8 BB each. He also bet the flop when he was ahead, while you did not when you got ahead on the turn, so at the end of the hand he bet 12 BB when ahead, and you raised 3 BB when you were ahead pre-flop. You can write the book featuring that hand "Poker by Dummies."



I am very happy you posted that hand because until you did I had literally no idea you were that bad at poker.

Keep up the good work, and remember it is a massive conspiracy, not your (hard to say this last word without laughing) skill... I really wish I could find that video that was posted on 2+2 recently in a thread I cannot remember of the guy screaming JUSTICE JUSTICE when his AA rivered to win a 40 cent pot (after he played it about as badly as you would have), but a few searches did not yield the result.

This was fun. You really do suck at poker. Keep playing, I like the nanostake tilt crazed whiny downward spiral you are experiencing, so keep at it and post more horribly played hands on a site you think is cheating you!

All the best.


P.S. I dare you to post that hand with your commentary about it (as posted in this thread) in the nano stakes strategy forum to see the replies (likely more polite) you get that you will pretty much ignore.

[x] knew the donk would get his river card
[x] calls flop
[x] calls turn
[x] calls river
[x] it always happens