Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > > >

Discussion of Poker Sites General discussion of online poker sites.

View Poll Results: Is Online Poker Rigged?
Yes 3,445 34.94%
No 5,522 56.01%
Undecided 892 9.05%
Voters: 9859. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-04-2009, 09:41 PM   #8176
KingOfFelt
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
KingOfFelt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: West Coast
Posts: 7,233
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounding4Rent View Post
I think you should try and understand the term variance.. Variance usually occurrs to players after a very large sample size... not within a couple hundred games. The fact that most players experience these ridiculous swings of "variance" in such a small sample of games makes me think "rigging" might be the better term.
Hilarious.
KingOfFelt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 09:58 PM   #8177
Rounding4Rent
journeyman
 
Rounding4Rent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 234
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
It is backwards, the larger the sample size the smaller the difference needs to be from the mean to be statistically significant
Right... but that's not what I was talking about.

I was talking about the occurrence of "variance"... People are calling it "variance" when a player starts losing after his first 100 games instead of "bad luck".
Rounding4Rent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 10:37 PM   #8178
NFuego20
Pooh-Bah
 
NFuego20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 4,295
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

and that would be an accurate description of what it is genius... more than one term can be used to describe the same thing
NFuego20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 10:59 PM   #8179
DMoogle
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DMoogle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern VA, USA
Posts: 7,132
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounding4Rent View Post
Right... but that's not what I was talking about.

I was talking about the occurrence of "variance"... People are calling it "variance" when a player starts losing after his first 100 games instead of "bad luck".
This:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFuego20 View Post
and that would be an accurate description of what it is genius... more than one term can be used to describe the same thing
DMoogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 11:19 PM   #8180
toltec444
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 496
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arouet View Post
Of course the possibility exists. It would be ludicrous to say otherwise and not one person in this thread has said so. What they've said is that it is unlikely because the risk of getting caught is not worth it. Note how that is not an issue in the other thread. The theory being advanced is that once the site realised it was going down anyway, it did what it could to prolong things, or something like that. By the time it would get caught it wouldn't matter anymore, which is why some posters are saying its not even worth pursuing. That actually makes sense too, much more so than that pokerstars or fulltilt is doing it.
What Im saying is that the risk of a Superbot being caught is very low. We as users cant detect them because we dont have access to the identity of the players that are sitting in the table.

The only way that someone could know that Superbots exist is one of the involved companie person tell us about it. But why someone that is involved in a Superbot project and is benefiting from that project would tell us about it. That just dont make sense.
toltec444 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 11:21 PM   #8181
NooooBingo
grinder
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Send Me
Posts: 626
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounding4Rent View Post
I think you should try and understand the term variance.. Variance usually occurrs to players after a very large sample size... not within a couple hundred games. The fact that most players experience these ridiculous swings of "variance" in such a small sample of games makes me think "rigging" might be the better term.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.......what?????? This is almost the EXACT OPPOSITE of what variance is.

Try flipping a coin 20 times. Do you think you'll get EXACTLY 10 heads and 10 tails? Probably not, due to VARIANCE.

However, if you flipped a coin 20,000 times, you'd be pretty damn close to even. You know why, because variance equals out over a large sample.

Before being so self righteous and arrogant, you should first KNOW what you're talking about.
NooooBingo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 11:24 PM   #8182
toltec444
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 496
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy View Post
Unless the superbots and superduperbots were created by a mystical force or just evolved on their own then indeed people would have to be behind them for the poker sites.

A lot of poker sites (again unless you suggest only a few use the superduperbots).

Several hundred and or thousands of online poker rooms have existed (many of which are gone now). That's a whole lotta superduperstupor bots programmed by someone.






So, these same couple of secret agent ninja programmer agents do it for all the poker sites? They certainly get around.

Well, even assuming they never tell a single person, they have to come in contact with people at all the hundreds of sites where they do their evil deeds. Lots will know what's going on.

That is unless they are invisible. Are they invisible?



Some would say the same thing with regard to taking the risk of committing an immense fraud on the public, yet you and others wave aside that risk as trivial and meaningless (ignoring any moral issues as well which some programmers may have).



You would not have to turn yourself in. Someone else would who knew what you were doing.

That is unless you are invisible.

Are you invisible?

All the best.

Obviously the core program of all software is made by the same people, and they probably sell it very expensive. Or do you think that party poker makes his own software, than pokerstars makes his own software etc.
toltec444 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 11:27 PM   #8183
Monteroy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,056
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by toltec444 View Post
What Im saying is that the risk of a Superbot being caught is very low. We as users cant detect them because we dont have access to the identity of the players that are sitting in the table.
The superduperbot is even harder to catch since it has duper in it's name as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by toltec444 View Post
The only way that someone could know that Superbots exist is one of the involved companie person tell us about it. But why someone that is involved in a Superbot project and is benefiting from that project would tell us about it. That just dont make sense.
The odds of an insider who knows of the superbots telling among the hundreds of sites (many of which are closed by now) is considerably higher than an imaginary superbot existing based on nothing more than fantasy of "what if."

This of course ignores the very real possibility of it being caught, as well as the immense risk many of these huge sites would be taking by having the entire business be essentially a criminal enterprise.

Those are real world issues. Your superbot is pretty much a product of an active imagination.

Then again, maybe we are all in a fancy Matrix like fake world run by super bots.

Scary.

Especially if they are invisible as well

Are they invisible?


Quote:
Originally Posted by toltec444 View Post
Obviously the core program of all software is made by the same people, and they probably sell it very expensive. Or do you think that party poker makes his own software, than pokerstars makes his own software etc.
I think that these sites that directly compete with each other are not as casual about who they hire for software development as you believe.

I would highly doubt that anyone who helped program Pokerstars software would even be allowed to work on another sites software.

Your imagination needs to tag into the real world once in a while to make it more fun.

That is unless all of the sites are secretly working together.

That would make them supersites

or superdupersites

Are they invisible?
Monteroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:51 AM   #8184
DonkoTheClown
adept
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 741
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy View Post
The superduperbot is even harder to catch since it has duper in it's name as well.




The odds of an insider who knows of the superbots telling among the hundreds of sites (many of which are closed by now) is considerably higher than an imaginary superbot existing based on nothing more than fantasy of "what if."

This of course ignores the very real possibility of it being caught, as well as the immense risk many of these huge sites would be taking by having the entire business be essentially a criminal enterprise.

Those are real world issues. Your superbot is pretty much a product of an active imagination.

Then again, maybe we are all in a fancy Matrix like fake world run by super bots.

Scary.

Especially if they are invisible as well

Are they invisible?




I think that these sites that directly compete with each other are not as casual about who they hire for software development as you believe.

I would highly doubt that anyone who helped program Pokerstars software would even be allowed to work on another sites software.

Your imagination needs to tag into the real world once in a while to make it more fun.

That is unless all of the sites are secretly working together.

That would make them supersites

or superdupersites

Are they invisible?
LOL!
DonkoTheClown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 01:22 AM   #8185
LetsGambool
banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 26,578
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounding4Rent View Post
Right... but that's not what I was talking about.

I was talking about the occurrence of "variance"... People are calling it "variance" when a player starts losing after his first 100 games instead of "bad luck".
Ive read this ten times now and have absolutely no idea what you can possibly think variance means.
LetsGambool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 01:46 AM   #8186
LVGambler
banned
 
LVGambler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: EXIT42O
Posts: 4,884
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

If you took out all of the "ridiculous theories" posted here and the immature, arrogant (and mostly pointless) replies, there would probably be 8,000 less posts here. Sad.. and annoying. Nobody's "proving" anything imo. All these mentions of HH's (on both sides).. yet nobody has the balls to post their own!

THIS THREAD IS FULL OF VARIANCE.. but I doubt it will ever even out to a n y t h i n g !
LVGambler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 01:48 AM   #8187
couriermike
adept
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 897
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Ever hear of Ramsey's Theorem?
couriermike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 02:27 AM   #8188
Rounding4Rent
journeyman
 
Rounding4Rent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 234
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

lol
Rounding4Rent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 04:30 AM   #8189
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVGambler View Post
If you took out all of the "ridiculous theories" posted here and the immature, arrogant (and mostly pointless) replies,
It doesn't really matter about the nature of the replies.

So long as they are there it means newcomers stumbling on the thread will appreciate that they cannot take what the rigtards say at face value.

If there were no replies, it would appear as if the rigging of on-line poker was an accepted fact.

Quote:
there would probably be 8,000 less posts here. Sad.. and annoying. Nobody's "proving" anything imo. All these mentions of HH's (on both sides).. yet nobody has the balls to post their own!
Since a suitable sample size would be in the tens of thousands I really don't think that anyone posting them onto a forum thread would win any popularity contests.


Thanks for your valuable contribution to the thread, though.
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 04:35 AM   #8190
DMoogle
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DMoogle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern VA, USA
Posts: 7,132
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVGambler View Post
If you took out all of the "ridiculous theories" posted here and the immature, arrogant (and mostly pointless) replies, there would probably be 8,000 less posts here. Sad.. and annoying. Nobody's "proving" anything imo. All these mentions of HH's (on both sides).. yet nobody has the balls to post their own!

THIS THREAD IS FULL OF VARIANCE.. but I doubt it will ever even out to a n y t h i n g !
There has been at least one proof with HHs. Spadebidder showed that on Stars board cards come out at expectation.
DMoogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 07:41 AM   #8191
LVGambler
banned
 
LVGambler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: EXIT42O
Posts: 4,884
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

I realize that not everyone can post their hand histories. But if you're gonna keep requesting them every time a riggy makes a bogus claim, you should have posted your own at one point. Kinda like "Hey, you should post your HH's.. I did!" But instead, most of the people who regularly post replies to the riggies just say something smart ass to belittle them. Not a great way to build up confidence in your case or prove your point.

Calling people names in replies sometimes makes you look as stupid as them. And if you don't provide "real evidence" when you're asking for it all the time, it just adds to the problem. So I'd say that the nature of the replies does matter. If a newcomer comes to this thread and sees all the name calling going on and the way that you guys gang up on people, it's not going to change their opinion at all. And it won't make what you guys are saying look any more valid than what the riggies are saying. Proof and common sense (along with respect) will do that.

DMoogle, you brought up spadebidder and said he posted HH's as proof.. once. Yet there's over 8,000 posts! I wonder how many times HH's have been asked for by the "there's no way in hell it's rigged, you ******ed, mental-illness suffering, tinfoil hat wearing dumbass!" crew?? I'm not saying everyone on that side is guilty of this sht all of the time.. but it is "an apparent theme" to this thread. (And yes, I know the riggies do it, too)


| /.
LVGambler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 08:07 AM   #8192
Arouet
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Arouet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,433
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by couriermike View Post
Ever hear of Ramsey's Theorem?

From wikipedia

Quote:
In combinatorics, Ramsey's theorem states that in any colouring of the edges of a sufficiently large complete graph (that is, a simple graph in which an edge connects every pair of vertices), one will find monochromatic complete subgraphs. For 2 colours, Ramsey's theorem states that for any pair of positive integers (r,s), there exists a least positive integer R(r,s) such that for any complete graph on R(r,s) vertices, whose edges are coloured red or blue, there exists either a complete subgraph on r vertices which is entirely blue, or a complete subgraph on s vertices which is entirely red. Here R(r,s) signifies an integer that depends on both r and s. It is understood to represent the smallest integer for which the theorem holds.
I'm a math noob, but is this saying that if we have everyone's graphs, there are going to be some parts which show people at either end of the variance spectrum? I'm probably completely misreading this but maybe when referring to something as complex as this you can just go straight to explaining why its relevant so we don't feel so stupid!




Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounding4Rent View Post
lol
lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by qpw View Post
Since a suitable sample size would be in the tens of thousands I really don't think that anyone posting them onto a forum thread would win any popularity contests.
Well, to be fair, and not to discourage anyone from posting their HHs, I assume that anyone willing to do this will upload the HHs to one of those file sharing sites and simply post a link!

LV: I don't think everyone just posting their entire HHs is what this thread needs. What is that going to accomplish? Are we all going to start analyzing each others HHs for kicks? If someone thinks theirs show a problem, that where the examination of HHs should start.

This thread is as much about critical thinking as anything else. It doesn't have to "get" anywhere - although I believe it has gotten somewhere. For every rigtard who religiously believes that their site is rigged, there are lurkers and even posters (Donko for example) for whom this thread has given a lot of food for thought. It's not about changing minds, its about forming the debate. It may be that this thread does end up revealing some cheating going on, who knows?

This thread is becoming a guidebook on how to approach thinking about riggedness. Maybe some enterprising person would go through the thread and assemble together the actual useful ones (I'm not volunteering, just sayin...)

Last edited by Arouet; 09-05-2009 at 08:09 AM. Reason: I do agree that we can do with less insults - although Monty is on a roll with this invisble theme!
Arouet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 08:23 AM   #8193
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVGambler View Post
I realize that not everyone can post their hand histories. But if you're gonna keep requesting them every time a riggy makes a bogus claim, you should have posted your own at one point. Kinda like "Hey, you should post your HH's.. I did!" But instead, most of the people who regularly post replies to the riggies just say something smart ass to belittle them. Not a great way to build up confidence in your case or prove your point.

Calling people names in replies sometimes makes you look as stupid as them. And if you don't provide "real evidence" when you're asking for it all the time, it just adds to the problem. So I'd say that the nature of the replies does matter. If a newcomer comes to this thread and sees all the name calling going on and the way that you guys gang up on people, it's not going to change their opinion at all. And it won't make what you guys are saying look any more valid than what the riggies are saying. Proof and common sense (along with respect) will do that.

DMoogle, you brought up spadebidder and said he posted HH's as proof.. once. Yet there's over 8,000 posts! I wonder how many times HH's have been asked for by the "there's no way in hell it's rigged, you ******ed, mental-illness suffering, tinfoil hat wearing dumbass!" crew?? I'm not saying everyone on that side is guilty of this sht all of the time.. but it is "an apparent theme" to this thread. (And yes, I know the riggies do it, too)


| /.
You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension.

There is a generally accepted tenet of a civilised society that you are innocent until you are proven guilty.

There is no requirement for people to post HH's to prove that the sites are not rigged. That is the default assumption under the generally accepted rules of a just society.

As to calling 'tards names, that behaviour is actually reserved for that particular breed of 'tard who asks what appears to be a reasonable question and when you have gone to the (often considerable) trouble of answering it in a clear and understandable manner using probability maths or logic, responds by calling you a shill.

If you are unhappy with the way 'tards are treated, why don't you have a go at answering their questions and getting called a shill for your trouble?
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 10:17 AM   #8194
spadebidder
Actually Shows Proof
 
spadebidder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This looks interesting.
Posts: 7,906
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by CLT123 View Post
I agree with you. I'd love to submit my entire hand histories to my own, and others, analysis. Where can I get full tournament history?

To be sure, I won many hands on my downslide. For sure, it's not like I lost 100% of the hands, not even close. I even caught a few lucky cards here and there, as we all do. And I certainly survived many all-in's, and I recorded those in my spreadsheet during that one run of tournaments I tracked. But common sense, without emotion, clearly indicates something is up on the whole including hands won and lost in view of the cascade of losing all in hands when I was a favorite or vast favorite. I would like to see my complete set of data - where do I get it from FTP?
If you still have the software installed, look in the program directory under full tilt / hand histories / username

Zip up everything and upload it somewhere. If you have them imported to pokertracker, just upload the db. If you have neither, email support@fulltiltpoker.net and ask for them to be emailed to you.
spadebidder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 11:00 AM   #8195
Bingo_Boy
old hand
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,872
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by CLT123 View Post
Yep, sure am. I taught at a university for 2 years in the south, then was an adjunct faculty for 1 year. Remember, when I tracked my 120 tournaments on the way up, it's because I wanted to see how FAST I could double my $100, and I wanted to know exactly my win rate and ROI (I had one column for ROI on buy-in and one for ROI on buy-in + entry -- the ROI for buy-in was 33.5%, of course higher than the 31% for buy-in + entry). I was not tracking data to prove FTP is rigged. It never crossed my mind. Everything was pretty normal on FTP to that point in time. My approach when I was suspicious was not wholly scientific, I agree. I tracked about 15-20 tournaments hand for hand that I contested to the river and cards were revealed. And in my final 15 tournaments, I took screen shots of every exiting hand when all-in. I wasn't so much set to prove FTP is rigged - I was hoping my "luck" would turn around, my "bad streak" would end - as to try to show myself that my exiting hands were within the realm of reasonableness. They were not, across the sample. What do you think the chances are that you could ask a friend to sit next to you and watch because he's about to see some theatrics - and to pull it off 3 tourneys in a row? I did that on Party Poker. And I sure could do it now on FTP. When you are a winning player, and I know I am, and suddenly things go sour, then REALLY sour, then UNBELIEVABLY sour, and finally what I would call IMPOSSIBLY sour - well, your logic radar goes off, and you set out to prove or disprove what you are seeing and what is happening.
As a statistics expert, perhaps you could answer the following for me:

1) By paying special attention to all the hands where you exited tournaments, what feature do all these cherry picked hands have in common? How does this affect your findings?

2) If you had started running good, would you have even posted in this thread? If the answer is 'no', what impact does this have on the relevance of your findings?

3) I understand that you do not have hand histories (which we now look forward to seeing) but why have you posted mind numbingly huge paragraphs rather than posting the data you have manually tracked?

Thanks
Bingo_Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:17 PM   #8196
indianaV8
old hand
 
indianaV8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Stuttgart
Posts: 1,385
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by spadebidder View Post
If you still have the software installed, look in the program directory under full tilt / hand histories / username

Zip up everything and upload it somewhere. If you have them imported to pokertracker, just upload the db. If you have neither, email support@fulltiltpoker.net and ask for them to be emailed to you.
He should just import in PT or HM and use any of the standard tools that display all-in equity, this should be enough. If he lost 85% so many times when being 80/20 favorite the allin vs actual graph would look ridicolous.

A picture's worth thousand words
indianaV8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:28 PM   #8197
tk1133
veteran
 
tk1133's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Making friends one post @ a time
Posts: 2,221
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by qpw View Post
It doesn't really matter about the nature of the replies.

So long as they are there it means newcomers stumbling on the thread will appreciate that they cannot take what the rigtards say at face value.

If there were no replies, it would appear as if the rigging of on-line poker was an accepted fact.



Since a suitable sample size would be in the tens of thousands I really don't think that anyone posting them onto a forum thread would win any popularity contests.


Thanks for your valuable contribution to the thread, though.
Why would you care if a newcomer saw this thread?
tk1133 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:31 PM   #8198
Arouet
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Arouet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,433
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by indianaV8 View Post
He should just import in PT or HM and use any of the standard tools that display all-in equity, this should be enough. If he lost 85% so many times when being 80/20 favorite the allin vs actual graph would look ridicolous.

A picture's worth thousand words
It's fine to look at the graph, but how do we interpret it? What is ridiculous? Many people will have lines that don't converge. How do we figure out if the gap is reasonable or not?

Also: On the PT3 website there are some reports saved which I think are useful to this type of analysis: one shows how often you flop a set and shows the ratio for you. Do any of you have any useful reports that we can use to examine our own databases?

Question really is how far can we use PT3 in determining whether we're running according to expectation? Or getting a propper distribution of cards. After all, we're not all in every hand.
Arouet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 12:42 PM   #8199
qpw
banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pulling the tails of rigtards
Posts: 4,019
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by tk1133 View Post
Why would you care if a newcomer saw this thread?
I wouldn't.
qpw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2009, 01:53 PM   #8200
toltec444
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 496
re: The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition

So the only argument we have to believe sites dont have superbots is that some good soul out there would have told us about it.

I think that ends the RNG riged discussion too, because if some kind of RNG manipulation existed that good soul would have told us about it.

Thinking better, we dont need to talk about none possible frauds in this world because if some fraud is happening that good soul wiould have told us about it, so we dont have to be concerned.

Monteroy....you live in paradise.
toltec444 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive