My HH is in text file form, and easy to send but it will include all the pre description and stuff. you know like postion button position, starting chip counts, etc. I dont know how i can get a file without all that stuff in it. I can send that, otherwise tell me how to edit it for flops only text type thing. And I did use all flops in my analysis not just ones i participated in. All flops seen.

[QUOTE=Pyromantha;12222392]I didn't understand that at all. Can you post it step by step - want to make sure we are doing the same thing.

cash games>>hands>>fliter>>edit>>board texture>>filter by flush cards>>all three one suit

I didnt mess with size of blinds or anything else,i used any for those options

Yeah, this is how you find how many hands had a flop which was all the same suit. I get that. How did you find how many flops there were in total?

Thats a great point! I beleive that is where my error is coming from. I need to take

(same suit flop)/(flops seen)

I did

(same suit flop)/(total hands)

I need a count on my flops seen to test it more.

You can count the flops as I posted above. In More Filters put 'pot size on bigger than 0 bbs' - if there wasn't a flop the hand gets filtered out, otherwise it's included. There doesn't seem to be any easier way of doing it.

Classic

To test it more? Don't you mean, to correct your huge mistake that you used to justify saying something was wrong with the deal? It happens, but just own up to it.

Don't you belong to a poker site/forum that produces and promotes illegal AI programs for poker sites?

How would it be relevant to smcdonn2's statistics being right or wrong if he was?

It would be relevent as to why Spade is posting here...

No. The folks that run that site also run pokerftp.com which provides a database of hands for statistical research, which I use. You know very well that I participate in that, as do some other posters on this thread, and that is well documented on these forums. I was around here well before that even became available by announcement on 2+2, which was the first time I ever heard of it. You will not find a single post or mention of my name anywhere on the site you speak of, unless it is somehow related to my downloading of their database. If you wish, you can email the administrators of that site and ask them if I have ever participated in any way. I have not.

The person who runs both sites is IndianaV8 on 2+2.

Thanks, dude. For your info I do have proof, or at least enough data to prove it to one way or the other to myself. I guess that's all that really matters. Also, I got warned so I guess I'll get back this fall when I get some of this sorted out. I wont post HH here anymore.

So, it is rigged or not?

Not.

Probably.

Those that actually play online poker are fairly certain it is rigged.

I play online poker and am not certain that it is rigged, and all the evidence I have seen leads me to believe it is not rigged.

Spot on.

You can absolutely believe whatever you choose to believe. You can believe the tooth fairy is the one responsible for all the bad things that happen to you in the world if that satisfies some need of yours.

I am a big believer that anyone can believe anything they wish, regardless of how detached from reality their beliefs happen to be. I only pointed out your very odd, inconsistent rigged beliefs because they followed no structure whatsoever which is quite rare for a riggedologist.

Even the most "out there" riggedologists whether it be timing, entropy or mafia theories at least have a consistency to their beliefs. If the mafia was in control they always were in control. Doomswitches were always doomswitches.

They could never prove anything (that goes without saying), but at least their beliefs followed a pattern that they could at least try to explain explain.

Your rigged beliefs do not even do that. You win as a short stack, lose as a short stack, win as a bigger stack, lose as a bigger stack, make the cash (thus making the tourney go longer).

Basically, all of your play goes against many of the conventional riggedologist beliefs, and even if once in a while they do fall into it, they are contradicted by an opposite event earlier in the same tournament (which I would have to assume is a micro/freeroll as that is where most riggedologists exist).

You did not even try to explain what your rigged theories are because you are literally one of the only riggedologists that cannot even do that. You say you have proof (which of course you will not provide), but proof of what exactly? Most riggedologists will never answer why the world is rigged against them, but at least they have a belief about how. You do not even seem to have that.

Note, I am not even asking to see your magical proof, I am just curious what forces you think are at work here?

It just seems like all your theory is is "I did not win in a MTT so it must be rigged." Even hard core riggedologists would be annoyed by that theory. You can do better.

All the best.

This is a true statement, not by belief but by laws of probability. The belief that "luck evens out" is false, and is not equivalent to saying that outcomes will approach the mean in the long run. Let's say you play a coin flip game betting on heads. You have a very lucky run and after 100 flips you have hit 75 heads. According to the binomial this will happen 1/43000 times the game is played to 100 flips. So you had a lucky run and you are 50 flips ahead of the opponent. Thereafter, there is no reason it will ever be evened out no matter how many more games you play. Your expectation for future games is 50/50 and your expectation is that you will forever be ahead by that 50 flips. The concept of regression to the mean just applies to proportion, not absolute numbers, meaning that the 50 flip lead will become a smaller and smaller part of the total as the trials get larger, thus your proportion is expected to get closer and closer to 50%. But your will never "make up" or "even out" that early winning streak, your expectation is that it puts you ahead forever. Likewise, your opponent is not expected to ever "catch up", he is expected to be behind by 50 flips forever (keep in mind this is a 50/50 game, poker is not). Luck does not even out.

On the other hand, poker is only partially a game of luck, and the luck factor can be exceeded by skillful play.

what evidence?

3 outer is almost a coinflip online

Just because you ignore anything anyone says that goes against your beliefs doesn't mean it hasn't been said.

No doubt, Why is he allowed to have an account on Twoplustwo...I'm not talking about the DB site....you know which one i'm speaking of...

Just my two cents:
I live poker were as loose as normally online play is, there would be a similar amount of frustration among its players.

Easily proven or disproven yet you choose not to bother. Enjoy wallowing in your denial and misery.