This thread is rigged..

So you have no real counter argument to a commonly experienced irregularity so you take license to extend my argument to extreme and obviously false conclusions. Got it.

True story from stars today. I am heads up with kings full on the river, one in my hand (AK) and two on the board. Villain goes all in. Do I insta-call? No. I have been so conditioned to be trapped on stars that I pause because the action tells me I am tying at best, possibly beat. Only thing that beats me is quad 3's or K10 on a board of 33K10K. I know I have to call though maybe villain has a naked 3 but no he has K10! The tragic part is I can get away from AK without that third K on the river. But no matter how much skill you have in reading people stars forces you to either lose or make ridiculous lay downs left and right. This anecdotal hh is not my offering of proof of riggedness, but this happens every mother****ing session without fail.

It doesn't matter. I have never gone against the prevailing thought and been wrong, ever. I am not a conspiracy theorist but I also never stray from common sense no matter what popular opinion is. One day what stars is doing will be demonstrated mathematically and I will be vindicated.

lol

It's commonly experienced but it's not an irregularity, it's you remembering "big hands" and forgetting all the times villain calls with worse because that's what's "supposed" to happen. And there are probably a few times where you call and he has KQ and you get all pissy that he hit a miracle five outer, right? Or how about the times where the river's an A and you completely forget about the hand because you won like you "should have"? That or you'll dismiss any proof presented (like you already have) and just continue to ramble on about how you "know" it's rigged.

Until that day comes, can I make fun of you? I promise to let you make fun of me all you want once it has been proven.

who wouldn't trust an island of convicts' descendants?

I can't stop you and have no need to. I truly want to believe stars is not rigged, and after playing on FT I believe they use a random deal. So I am not here condemning all of online poker. Nor I am I shilling for FT. In fact all other things equal I would rather play on stars for their customer service/security/ease of transactions. I am a winning player on both sights (though my stars wins are nowhere near what they should be). But I will never go against my common sense. People are not supposed to get quads on you constantly, pair there inferior kicker constantly aipf, beat your full houses, etc etc etc. Playing there I really feel that as long as the villian has 2 or more outs they are flipping with me.

Maybe I was just wishful in saying it would be proven. Nobody has access to the data. Taking HH from poker trackers is not a random sample. Therefore it will never be proven most likely. But for the same reason it will never be proven fair. In the absence of a rigorous proof, which is exactly where we find ourselves regardless of our beliefs, I think people should use their common sense.And if someone's common sense tells them they are being cheated, then unless you have seen what they have it is not defensible to condemn them. When I posted a string of stars beats here I was told they didn't happen. But they did. I have absolutely no reason to say anything against stars.

And it's not just me. I see people with bigger samples than me just continuing to diverge further and further from their expectation and it's seems like it is always at stars. Most of these people lack the guts to question the integrity of the site because to do so is going against a very prevalent and foundational assumption of a fair deal. They just keep on playing, diverging ever further, losing 70/30 after 70/30 yet keeping the faith that one day it will magically end. It won't.

Not that you fall into this category necessarily (maybe you do but not to the extent of some people), but a lot of people's version of "common sense" is really, really flawed. There are people out there who are plain awful at poker who actually think they know what they're doing. Yet it's plain to see for any winning player why they are losing money. In that player's eyes though, it must be rigged because they're good and they still can't win.

I agree on some level that it's not defensible to condemn somebody in this situation when you haven't seen what they've seen. Problem is, in this thread, that's not the case. For you to come on here and say "I lost 10 70/30s in a row" isn't "seeing what you've seen". It's fabricated bullcrap. If you're that convinced something is wrong then provide your whole databases or at least entire sessions worth of data. Anybody who has played any reasonable amount of poker can pull together as many 70/30 losses as we want, cherrypick them out of our samples, and whine about them. It appears that's what you're doing. If not, and something is happening that's honestly that far off from the norm in terms of standard deviations, then by all means pull the evidence together and let's look at it. There are many people in this thread who can help.

People must play correctly and play for a considerable amount of time in order to win money playing poker. I hear video poker players (all the time) complain that they've never hit a Royal Flush. I ask them if they play a lot and they tell me "Yeah, at least a few hours a week." Then I ask them if they play correctly and they tell me "What do you mean?", "I think I do." Well..

You MUST play correctly, over a long period of time, in order to win money playing poker. There is a lot of "chance" involved with any poker game. The only way to offset that is to play a lot. Why do you think people multi-table? The casino makes money because it is consistent, not because it "knows how to play better than you do". It has an edge that rakes in a lot of money over the long run.

~ Be a casino my friend ~

** A great read: http://gpsts.org/poker-a-game-of-skill

Confirmed it's rigged.

I take money from the fish WAY too quickly.

Burden, correct me if I'm wrong but your post seems to imply that you do indeed use pokertracker. If that's true, have you actually played around with the stats? have you actually looked at how many times you actually lost to quads? Can you tell us how many times it happened, and over how many samples?

Sure, one person's database will not "prove" anything. However, it does tell part of the story, and may give rise to further investigation.

Please do this one search: quads, and tell us the results.

poker is beatable, poker is random, poker is fair is not the same.

beatable: yes
fair: absolute not
random: nearly

Its no secret that any kind of cheating is verry common today it starts with
tracking software and ends with hacking accounts.

The shuffling is maybee random..ok a few know the wholecards..ok a few know the flop in advance..but thats more cheating. The 1-3 BB / 100 intelligent shuffling is not a big problem as long as you win.

I don't read this thread much because ultimately it bores me. With that said I will share with the riggedies the kind of stuff they like.

I've played poker for a long time and had 2 firsts happen today, in the same day. For me, as ****ty as it was, a weird way it's kinda nice to know I still haven't seen it all.

anyway had top set beat by a smaller pocket pair all in on the flop beaten by runner,runner, perfect, perfect quads, TWICE in the same session. This is of coarse after never having that situation happen to me before, so I guess it was due. lulz

Sht, now I'm subscribed. How do I not subscribe to threads I post in? (serious question)

Click on the "My 2+2" tab - Subscribed Threads

Then put a check beside the thread, go to the bottom of the list where it says "selected threads", change that to "delete subscription", Hit Go, lose the enjoyment of, IMO, this still very entertaining thread.

tyvm.

I'm thinking of starting a magazine called "Online's Rigged Weekly". Anyone interested? These fools lose their money all the time.. why not cash in on it in other ways? We can have really neat pictures and bullsht articles about our ongoing investigations into fixed RNG's.. call it "RNG's Uncovered: The Truth You Already Knew". I think this could be huge We could advertise it on PrisonPlanets and Truth-Seekers.org.

Actually this was pretty much done, though sadly I lost the link to the site. Was a few years ago (during the bonus whoring era) where one affiliate site went with the idea of proving it was all rigged.

Imagine everything said in this thread and more and it was all catered to those who wanted to be part of a group that believed it was all rigged and corrupt.

Now, to help them they needed people to sign up at the rooms and play for a bit to help show it was rigged. They heaped praise on those who posted their bad beats and theories as proof, and they had "experts" to help explain how it was rigged when given all of the evidence.

They had links for dozens of sites and I was totally amazed at the people who took pride in helping expose dozens of sites being rigged by signing up , playing for a day, and showing hands as proof.

Each time they got someone to do this they took in $50-100 per sign up.

It was actually a brilliant business plan that appealed to and fed the needs of the paranoid player base. They never gave any incentives or rakeback. All they gave was a pat on the back and praise.

I was annoyed I had not thought of it first

I was only joking, but wow.

I don't use poker tracker. I play a lot of live poker but I am trying to switch to playing online but I, frankly, am too lazy to learn get into poker tracker and since I play HU I would not want to rely on personalized stats which are too static for HU play. I can't say offhand how many times someone has had quads on me when I was full. But the weird part is when I have quads it seems the other guy is always there with a full. In my rigging charge against stars I do not claim that they single me out. I just think that there is a very much increased chance that both players make a hand in HU. I played a few stngos on stars just today and it was the same thing. J4 out flops my AA. aipf with 1010 vs. 22, 22 flops set. I have K10 aipf against a tilting maniac who happens to pick up JJ in this 5th time he open shoves in a row. But I get a 10 on the flop and, yes, a 3rd 10 on the river ship it. Also from the half hour I played there I get beat by A5 vs. my AK aipf and I beat AQ with A10s aipf. It is really like bingo, not poker. So just to clarify I it not just that my dominating hands don't win enough, but I honestly believe that my dominaTED
hands win too much.

But anyway I am happy on FT now and I expect for my online rate to eclipse my live very soon and that has been kind of a goal of mine so you won't hear too much more out of me.

This isn't that weird. Most of the time when you have quads the board has trips on it, making an opposing full house pretty likely.

It'd be pretty easy to confirm or deny this with PT or HEM. All these are kind of irrelevant without knowing stack sizes and how they were played. Again, easily proved or disproved by loading the hands into a tracker instead of going by memory which is biased to remember "weird" things.

Well, I appreciate that you don't use pokertracker for the reasons you gave (although I would suggest to you that you'd probably get some benefit out of it, if only to review your play after your session). I believe there are some free tracker programs out there (play around with google, you'll find one). I'm not saying your results may not be atypical, but I would suggest that until you analyze them a little deeper, you shouldn't trust your memory too much here. Especially over 1000s of hands.

Obviously a few cherry picked SNGs would be a biased sample anyway but you still chose to list the hands where the underdog won to make your point (assuming they aren't just made up anyway because we have no HHs of course). Were there no all ins where the favourite won and if so why are you ignoring them?

qpw, are you still alive?