But then we'd have to audit the auditor, then audit the auditor's auditor, then audit the auditor's auditor's auditor, etc. There's no amount of proof that can convince some people, because the conspiracy can always go deeper for them. I'll get back to you in 2025 or so.

Prav quick question about your xls, regarding your equity percentage. Are ties included or excluded in that percentage? Basiclly how are you accounting for ties?

Just courious.

FTP is rigged.
Bet the house on it.

your evidence continues to convince me, thanks for that

Can someone please post the rigged odds vs true odds of this thread actually going anywhere (meaningful)?

Well sharkscope says that 2/3 are losing players. I actually play HU stngo's (and cash). I don't see why the win rates would be too different for HU than in the other stng'os. If anything there would be higher variance. I don't know how to estimate the standard deviation since I am always playing different people who I have different win rates (including losing rates) against. I mean how much can you derive from the single fact that 2/3 of players lose?

Actually Pyro, if I could treat each stngo opponent as the average opponent then getting the spread is simple. I just don't know if that is valid or not.

Because the odds of cashing in a HU is 50/50 where a 9 man for example is 1/3.

I'd bet the house on every form of internet gambling being rigged. Slots, Poker, Blackjack, Roulette, etc.

You'd win a lot of money. They're rigged by rake or house edge. You should be able to figure out which rigging applies to which game.

EDIT: You can probably drop the word "internet" though since it applies to those games live as well.

If you are playing heads-up the mean will be about -4.5% rather than -9% (heads-up tables are like $10+0.5 right?).

If we assume the distribution is normal and you said that 2/3rds are losing players, then 33% are over 4.5% ROI above the mean. Online z-score tables say that 33% of results lie further than 0.43 s.ds above the mean, so 0,43s.d. = 4.5% EV, or 1 s.d is about 10.4% ROI.

Your observed ROI was 15%, meaning that in for example a $10.5 SNG you receive $12.075 on average per event, so you win 60.37% of the time. Is this the same number you see in PokerTracker or wherever?

We can work out your standard deviation from this since you play HU games. 60.37% of the time you win $9.50, 39.63% of the time you lose $10.50. The mean is +$1.575, the variance is

0.6037 * (9.5-1.575)^2 + 0.3963 * (-10.5 - 1.575)^2
= 37.915755815 + 57.7827691875
= 95.698

s.d. per event is 9.7825.

Next we need to construct a discretized a priori distribution, using blocks or ROI like 0-1% ROI, 1-2% ROI, etc. Then calculate the probability that 15% ROI was observed if you had 0-1% 'actual' ROI, 1-2% actual ROI, etc etc, then use Bayes Theorem.

Sorry to leave you in suspense but will have to get back to this later

As a little taster in a slightly different direction we see that if you played 300 $10 HU events which have a variance of somewhere around 95 'dollars squared', then the s.d of those 300 events is $168. If your 'true' ROI turned out to be 10%, then the 15% you witnessed over 300 games would only be a 1 standard deviation occurrence, ($168/300 = $0.56 = 5.6% ROI), and the 6% you witnessed in another set of games would also be a 1 s.d. occurrence. (if it was a sample of 300 games, you didn't state how big the second sample was).

The interesting thing is that online casinos have a much more colorful and brief history (in terms of fast growth then relative decline) compared to poker, and much of it had to do with the extremely generous bonuses that were available 3-5 years ago, and to a lesser extent 2 years ago (most have faded by now).

Casinomeister has spent years doing all of the proper monitoring that you and your fellow riggedologists never bother to do, and the results are evident.

http://www.casinomeister.com/rogue/index.php

Look what he does. He actually proves his cases without any bias or hidden agenda, and indeed a few casinos were found to have software that was not proper. They tended to be tiny fringe operations which is not surprising.

Most of the problems were casinos that did not honor their terms of conditions or did not pay out cash outs, or ignored customer complaints.

This guy does not just troll message boards and spam "I know it's rigged because of timing/entropy/mafia/forest critters," he actually does the work and provide the proof and evidence to weed out the bad casinos.

He also makes it clear that the vast majority of casinos, especially the large publicly traded companies, are all quite legitimate, which also is not shocking since every game has a built in house edge.

That is why for years back in the 2002-2005 range a bunch of people (including myself) could make a considerable amount by bonus whoring. In 2003 it was easy to make over $3,000 a month without a huge time investment, maybe 8-10 hours a week (that one could do while playing poker since it was all automatic). Some of the casinos even had auto play. I was lucky that I never had an issue with a single casino (though I did come close with Empire casino as they stopped paying people shortly after I got my money).


This did not last because eventually the casinos were crushed by the increasing number of bonus whores so they changed their terms and conditions to stop this effect. Intercasino used to have a 20x $100 monthly blackjack bonus that could often time be stacked with other monthly specials. Now they have a 25x slots bonus and their non blackjack card games are 60x or something.


You riggedologists seem to think that us proponents blindly support any online gambling industry. That is hardly the case, and in fact I am happy that some genuine watchdogs like Josem in poker and casinomeister in casinos have helped make this industry more secure for all players. That is also why if any of you riggedologists actually prove anything, I will be the first to thank you for your work.

People like Josem and casinomeister do the real work that is needed and they tackle real issues. What exactly do you, Scooper,tk and all the other riggedologists in this thread do again?

All the best.

The better quesion is: What can we do? You see - the poker industry has a GOOD scam going that is very hard to be detected. They're a bit smarter.

Guys like you? Not a thing as all you do is whine about conspiracies you create in your head that you say can never be caught even though you seem to know exactly what is happening (quite the paradox).

Guys like Josem, spade and others who have actual expertise and ensure that the games are fair (both from the rooms and among the players). They do a ton, and again everyone should thank them for their effort.

Note, I do not begin to claim I help monitor the games in any macro sense other then the times I have reported soft play and collusion and multi accounting (on Crypto in tournaments), but even those small efforts multiplied by tons of players who report the same when they see it adds up.

Guys like you? Totally useless and to be blunt utterly pathetic. You waste time and actually do nothing other then say that it is impossible to do anything.

Other people actually do things to make the games more secure. You whine about "timing."

That is why when you remove all of the snark and silly chats, you are essentially a complete joke to everyone. That is your lot in life, so make the most of it.

All the best.

R4R, you've been asked many times to provide your hand histories, to explain what "TIMING" is, and to explain why you thought the graphs you posted are proof of riggedness. You've been asked if you have any other evidence other than the graphs you've posted.

Many members of this forum have detailed exactly what an individual can do to get an investigation going. While an individual's results will not be determinative, they will get the ball rolling and perhaps lead to further investigation if something is amiss.

Here is my theory of "timing"

very uplifting.. thank you


monteroy you realize this is an internet poker forum right?

Absolutely, and this thread is where they jam all the guys on soapboxes together who never actually prove anything.

This is also why 99% of the time my posts in this thread are quite tongue in cheek with lists of riggedology commandments, Lizard people etc. I realize your "timing" theory is your life's work and it has a deep meaning to you, but to the rest of the world it is just another variation of all of the theories and bad beat stories that hundreds before you have whined about.

Do you openly believe everyone's theories as well? The entropy theory. The mafia theory. The seating by location theory. The big stacks win too much theory. The small stacks win too much theory. The cash out curse theory. The bonus clearing curse theory. The RnG manipulation to help fish theory. The house bot filling half the tournaments theory. This can go on and on.

Yours is the "timing" theory, and while you have spent more effort creating a much larger manifesto of your imagined world, the fact is it is just one (albeit a more colorful one) of an assortment of wild, often times conflicting theories about the mystical shadowy world you believe exists.

So while I will go back to having fun with this thread by playing along, annoying various paranoid people about their theories and helping them construct more theories about my dark, shilling ways, once in a while a reality check is needed which is what my last couple of posts were about.

Reality is as I stated - many people in many ways do a lot of constructive things that benefit all of the players in the online gaming industry. I mentioned a few, but there are a ton more who do ACTUAL work to root out the "bad guys" whether those bad guys are insiders in a poker room, or players.

Guys like you do absolutely nothing useful to making the industry any better. You waste a lot of time and effort with your intricate theories that you can describe in complete detail, yet are somehow unable to prove, and you never actually present any verifiable statistical data that backs your theories. At most we get cherry picked hands/charts or a vague conclusion that "it is impossible to detect."

The risk guys like you present is that you waste the time of those who are doing actual constructive work to ensure that the games are as fair as possible if they get distracted by you. Otherwise you are as Douglas Adams would say "mostly harmless."

You are free to believe whatever you like, but you cannot or will not be taken seriously as a force of change, because you never actually do anything. Sure, guys like Scooper who could not beat the game and want validation will love yours or any rigged theory as it mocks an industry they hate (due to their failure), but in terms of any real impact there is none.

You just whine about the cruel evil world that is conspiring against you. Go to Walmart, buy a set of discounted testicles, and do some work and then show actual verifiable data analysis if you ever want to be considered something other than a complete joke.

And now, back to the program...

Wow, timing effects, that sounds so cool. How exactly does that mesh with cashout curses and big stacks winning too many all ins and is the mafia behind it all? I'd love to hear your thoughts on these important matters. Perhaps I can add a commandment to the list if I am duly impressed.

All the best.

That's what I thought. Cashout curse, etc. I think that post of yours has been dicussed in depth, and we don't need to revisit it all now, however, I would ask you the following:

You've posted some graphs in there, showing the times you've deposited and cashed out and how you ran in between. If they are rigging pots against you, then you must admit that this will show up somewhere in the stats. Why don't you PM QPW the handhistories for the time period you set out in those graphs, and let him do an analysis. We know it won't be perfect, given a relatively small sample, but I'm sure the results will tell some story, within a certain range of accuracy. QPW has offered to do this, why not take him up on the offer? He may be a jerk, and thinks you're FOS, so show him up, send him what you have, and make him eat his words. Or, if the results show nothing amiss, be prepared to alter your position.


I think you will find a lot of support in this forum if true rigging is found to occur.

If someone has a giant database of showdowns, we may be able to combine it with data from Sharkscope or something and at least get *some* player demographic data - to get a rough idea of stuff like skill level, experience level, avg tables played at once - maybe even if the player has taken a lot of time off but recently come back. Although I'd really like to find a way to get the player's location on there too. Maybe there is a way to gather that from PS - if nothing else an army of "rigtards" gathering location info. Or we could do a regression test on people with funky characters in their names, vs. non-funky characters. Ha.

Since PS apparently has no interest in a real 3rd-party code audit, this may be the only realistic option. If someone can get me those datasets, I'd be more than happy to do a proper regression analysis. FYI - I'm not a statistical expert, more of an educated amateur. But I have access to someone who works for one of the top statistical consulting firms in the country. With him as my boss I used to run regression tests in SAS all day. He could verify my methodology so I have no doubt the final analysis would be sound.

But as I've said, I still think there's a tiny chance PS is actually rigged. So I'm not going to spend months gathering data. But I will do the analysis.

You mean like Rainkhan flopping quad Qs and now makes a million per year in endorsements from PS because of it? Ooops... gotta hurl now... ...

...ok I'm back. WSOP rigged obv.

You do realize Josem works for PS right? In no way am I bashing the guy, I know him IRL and think he's extremely trustworthy. But it's a fallacy to hold someone up as a consumer watchdog who actually works for the company you're trying to watch.

Actually it is a fallacy to think he CAN'T be because of his employer. I think Josem has proven he is a very strong resource when it comes to ensuring/investigating fair play online.

By definition, a consumer watchdog CANNOT work for the company he is supposed to be policing. He can still be a good resource in general, and it's even possible if he did uncover something from the inside he would quit his job and expose it. But you cannot count on that.

Why, thank you, kindly.

There isn't a hope in hell that a true rigtard will change his position.

The code for the analysis is now written and I'm just writing some explanation for the probability maths that will be needed to interpret the results.

But I know in advance that the rigtards will do one of two things:

1) Simply refuse to accept the data on the grounds that I am (in their minds) a known supporter of the on line poker industry.

2) Demand more and more intricate tests to test ever more convoluted theories.

I'm only prepared to produce something that will allow a reasonable person to see that the cards thay were dealt do or do not fall within the bounds of reasonable expectation.

Otherwise I'd just spend months producing more and more tests in reposnse to objection (2) before they ran out of theories and switched to objection (1).

qpw, this data would be incredibly useful if you could combine it with equity info. on the showdown and player demographic info.

As is, it *could* turn up anomalies if some existed. But you can't hold it up as proof that there is no manipulation. As I've said - if you were going to change a card for rigging purposes, it would be trivially easy to a reverse swap in some meaningless spot later. This would cover your tracks for any kind of random card distribution analysis.