Filter for sngs please. Shouldn't take a genius to realize that having sngs where you can only win 8 starting stacks per game (assuming you talk 9-man sngs) and a mtt where you can win hundreds of starting stacks in a single hand don't belong in the same graph for chip equity. You have seen how much your freeroll bink screwed up the y-axis, haven't you? And still did not get the idea to filter it out (and the other mtts also of course, it's easy)?

Also, 4.78x is not the way you measure it, because this alone basically gives no information. If you have 1000 chips starting stacks, and are expected to win 4780 chips after 500 games, but really only win 1000, then that says nothing. Because this difference is explainable by one single bad beat hand, thus isn't "immensly high". Shouldn't also take a genius to figure that one out.

500 sngs isn't much of a sample at all (even world class players happen to have 1000+ game downswings caused by variance alone), but if you were expecting to win 478k chips and only won 100k or something remotely similar, then I'd say it's worth to look closer at your data. I honestly can't tell anything, because you weren't smart enough to filter your data as explained above.

Also, your tracker has the ability to graph "expected $ won" compared to "$ won", and that is the only somewhat accurate way to judge if you did run bad over a sample or not. You can lose all your chips and win money in the same sng, that means you run worse than expected concerning chips, and still better than expected concerning money in said sng. That's why chip ev is indeed meaningless.
Just assume you come in second for every 9 man sng you play. Your roi is a whopping 180% or something, while running horrible in chip ev.

You surely realized by now that an average IQ absolutely should suffice to understand all that by simply thinking through the question "How can I post a meaningful graph?", but oh well.

Your post just confirms their "theory", obviously.

Touche

No, I were AlmostShark when I created account here and this forum is so rigged that it doesn't allow me to change nickname or even say ****

Create a new posting account, and remember to vote often in the thread like many riggies do.

You guys are not to good at working around pretty easy systems.

All the best.

destined to be booted out of the mensa club.

Hi Monteroy .


Wanna add day rig to ure list ?

Im feeling that after a good day session i instantly
get limited on gains . maybe im with stupido dunno

why dont i send to u my 2 last days so u can
see the absurd day to day change in rng behaviour , maybe i succumbed
to paranoia that natural variance can give , but at least im not hiding my play so i challenge u to watch my data from last 2 days and if u find it absurd i can give u all my data because its always the same **** , if u find it normal hey u can have a laugh and add another one to ure collection

http://youtu.be/obFHu7DCsEs

Everyone fuzzy on stats should watch an episode of Through the Wormhole called "Is Luck Real?" for some good basic stat explanations.

i did watch

http://youtu.be/0jclqrdZ-Os

While there is always some room for improvement, my play is for all intents are purposes perfect among those at the microstakes.

Likely some 100nl players and above play better, but I've honestly never seen anyone I considered equal or better at poker than me at the micros.

BBED, you posted hands played terribad enough to safely say that is a very wrong statement. Think about that one.

None of the hands I've posted ITT were played badly. Villain sucked out or coolered me every time.

Bold is probably the biggest understatement in this thread.

How about reinventing your gimmick. This one is getting stale.

In general the RNg deals the same amount of beats to everyone. WHat should be exposed is the sites ability to effect dealings and card distribution short term to selected players at will.Some players simply seem to get an easier ride than others

and how exactly do they determine who deserves the boomswitch?

When you're dealing with literally millions of players on hundreds of different sites, of course this is going to happen. It's basic statistics.

I love how he just takes statements that are obviously true, i.e.

"In the short term, some players are luckier than others."

and tries to use them as evidence of rigging.

fyp

Dozens will just confuse them, and make them continue to believe they're beautiful unique snowflakes. I'm leaning more towards Carl Sagan.

Like calling a massive overbet with K9 on a AK9xA board? Right.

That is lolbad enough to safely assume that you are nowhere near as good as an average micro grinder.

yo futballer, how about getting a basic understanding of randomness and statistics instead of making dumb statements and diffaming the people who have?

Still unable to show your "interesting spikes of variance", liar? You know how to post a pic, surprisingly enough.

See, if hundreds of your kind failed to prove a rig, there's two possibilities: There is no rig (you're idiots), or you are too dumb to prove it (you are even mindblowingly dumber idiots). Or is there a third option?