There would be damn good reason to do it, as Americans may be gone in 6 months anyway. You'd want to foster European players, keep them happy, and keep that money in their hands. I'm not saying it's being done, because it almost certainly is not. But don't say there's no positive outcome from favoring non-Americans, because right now there is.

Shuffling and dealing algorithms don't even know that Qs and Qh are similar cards. They at totally different byte values with no relationship at all. They only have significance when it comes time to calculate poker hands and see who won, after all dealing is done.

As for the "only cheat Americans" school of rigging, since we have no in-country regulation, I wonder what happens when we sit at a table filled with players who live in the Isle Of Man jurisdiction, for example, and can probably walk down to the Gambling Commission office if they have a complaint. Maybe next time I sign up for an account, I'll use that as my address to make sure I get favorable cards.

is there anyway to get more people to vote in this poll? there's gotta be more than 156 visitors to this website.
this is really only my second post Arouet. I'm not saying that I am certain that online poker is rigged but it probably is and all the usual arguments you hear made for rigged and not rigged haven't been researched enough to prove anything, put out all the numbers and statistics you want but really no one has the time or money to invest to really research this properly if they do they probably have better things to do. I for one am a little leary about people who vehemently defend online poker sites in these forums.
lets get more people to vote in this poll!

how is Rigtards voting that they lose because of a nefarious plot to help "fish" play longer (why doesn't it benefit them?) the same as providing hard evidence?

not trying to provide hard evidence, I can't. would like to see more people voting in this poll rigtards or shills, it doesn't matter to me.

but to what ends?

What if the players were trying to slowplay eachother? What would FT do to make them get all-in? Or would the system assplode?

12-bet successive river min-raising ftmfw.

Well we know UB doesn't have anything to make sure all the money gets in.

Stage #1324603887: Holdem No Limit $0.50 - 2009-03-20 23:56:45 (ET)
Table: BATTLEFORD DR (Real Money) Seat #2 is the dealer
Seat 2 - OWPTOUR ($34.50 in chips)
Seat 3 - WUHAAA ($60.05 in chips)
Seat 4 - XMAN9 ($28.05 in chips)
Seat 5 - DANIELMARIO ($49.82 in chips)
Seat 6 - RELOADNGO ($57.82 in chips)
Seat 8 - MITZU ($32.55 in chips)
Seat 9 - THE_TAZZ ($51 in chips)
Seat 1 - ROCNRON ($17.50 in chips)
WUHAAA - Posts small blind $0.25
XMAN9 - Posts big blind $0.50
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to THE_TAZZ [10c 2s]
DANIELMARIO - Calls $0.50
RELOADNGO - Raises $2 to $2
MITZU - Folds
THE_TAZZ - Folds
ROCNRON - Folds
OWPTOUR - Folds
WUHAAA - Folds
XMAN9 - Folds
DANIELMARIO - Calls $1.50
*** FLOP *** [7c Qh Jh]
DANIELMARIO - Checks
RELOADNGO - Checks
*** TURN *** [7c Qh Jh] [10h]
DANIELMARIO - Checks
RELOADNGO - Checks
*** RIVER *** [7c Qh Jh 10h] [8c]
DANIELMARIO - Checks
RELOADNGO - Checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
DANIELMARIO - Shows [9h 8h] (Straight flush, queen)
RELOADNGO - Shows [Kh Ah] (Royal flush)
RELOADNGO Collects $4.55 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot($4.75) | Rake ($0.20)
Board [7c Qh Jh 10h 8c]
Seat 1: ROCNRON Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 2: OWPTOUR (dealer) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 3: WUHAAA (small blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 4: XMAN9 (big blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 5: DANIELMARIO HI:lost with Straight flush, queen [9h 8h - B:Qh,B:Jh,B:10h,P:9h,P:8h]
Seat 6: RELOADNGO won Total ($4.55) HI$4.55) with Royal flush [Kh Ah - P:Ah,P:Kh,B:Qh,B:Jh,B:10h]
Seat 8: MITZU Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 9: THE_TAZZ Folded on the POCKET CARDS

Although maybe they have a second rigging program running to ensure the BBJ gets paid out less often.

Was that BBJ, and even if so, can you explain the thinking on not betting? I mean no one's going to fold a monster ever. So why not bet and make money all the times they have a flush or straight or something? Or do the HHs not show chat?

That's not his hand (I'm pretty sure, at least), that's a hand that was posted here a few months ago.

IIRC if the pot had gone over $5 or something then a BBJ would've been paid out.

When you have superusers, software pushing the pot towards the sponsored pro instead of the winner of the pot, and suspicious play that avoids a BBJ being paid out, I, for one, would recommend staying away from that site.

Yep, plus cheap labor and total lack of any regulation as well. I don't blame them at all just don't expect the US gov to roll over until you come and operate on thier soil.

Ahhhh, starting to see where you're coming from. Now I know why you hadn't appeared in this thread before now. You're not a rigtard at all are you? You're a different kind of shill...

wtf, Isle of Man is a Crown Dependency of the UK. For whatever you say about it (cold, etc.) claiming that it has "cheap labour" and "total lack of any regulation" is just nutty.

One of the benefits of being stupid is that you don't need to rely on "facts" and "logic" when arguing. Makes arguing easier, IMO.

not a gimmick account.... right

if the pole was

Is Online Poker Rigged ?

1. yes
2. no
3. i dont know

you would see a lot more votes. i had to abstain

It's a meaningless poll, though. I voted in it, and had to vote that I thought that online poker IS rigged, just because of all the crap that has happened (and likely is still happening) at AP and UB. I considered all the superusers, bonus misrepresentation, etc. to be a form of rigging and couldn't in good conscience vote "no".

If the poll were to ask if I thought there was any rigging at any of the major sites, I'd have answered "no".

Apparently the average weekly wage in the Isle of Man was £568.76 in 2008 (http://www.gov.im/treasury/economic/data/earnings.xml). This works out to about $48k a year. Doesn't seem like particularly cheap labour.

The only problem with that is that it changes the nature of the thread entirely. The things you mentioned, while dishonest, in no way involve the rigging of the RNG, which is the only thing at issue in this thread. There are a million other threads discussing the things you mentioned.

You should look up a few definitions of rigged. Nothing you mention is a form of "rigged". Rigged means the game is manipulated by the operator to be unfair. The bolded words are all essential. In poker, that means not dealing cards randomly.

On the other hand, there's not any doubt that cheating has and does occur, and most sites are diligent about policing it. But no site has ever been shown to have rigged the deal, and there hasn't even been any evidence that is remotely convincing.

Any shills want to respond or provide an explanation for this?

Have you ever even tried to grasp the concept of selective memory when it comes to random events? Think of all the people out there. This guy had a pretty severe beginners luck type experience. Do you think we'd be hearing from all the people who didn't? No. We hear from the outliers who either ran hot as balls or couldn't win a thing when they first logged on. Both are instinctively going to think something is up. It's human nature.

But I guess I'm a shill now.

I dont think everyone on the Online Poker defence side is a shill here and Im not so pig headed that I believe everyone disagreeing with me is a shill.

Its just that everyone I peak to about Online Poker is saying the same thing about initial hotstreaks after deposits on a new site.

Are those people factoring in initial deposit bonuses when they look at their bankroll?

Epic fail shill argument!

Similar to; "Your playing way more hands online so your bound to see more bad beats".