A worse hand Means a worse hand. It's not vague at all.
MONTROLLING

Exactly. So how can we benefit from a streak? U can't. This is my point. U don't know u are in a streak until u are in 1 and u don't know when it will end. It's not something u could use to your benefit

Can everybody PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD stop "debating" with jungmit?

Why? It can be fun when done properly to see what someone of his kind "thinks." Obviously anyone who genuinely believes that he will understand or learn anything is wasting time, but some people enjoy trying to educate the uneducatable for a variety of personal reasons. I like asking him direct questions that he will avoid answering and pointing out the many times he lies, as doing that amuses me as a small diversion. Others are trying to get him to understand basic mathematics in futility, and perhaps that amuses them to an extent.

Grandpa geezer riggie is literally the clown side show as seen in Cirque shows between acts (as they change the stage), nothing more. Some people hate those clowns, others are amused by them, but really all their job is is filling time between shows, or in this case between actual riggies. Grandpa geezer does his job in that regard and he gets attention as his payment, which is what he craves. He would be the nightmare of those IRS scam guys because he would talk to them on the phone for hours, yet have no money to steal in the end. He has an entertainment role in this thread, so why yell at those who use him as such.

All the best.

I just feel like this is the same as laughing at someone who has a mental disability.

Threads of this kind will always attract those who have a special outlook on life, but debating them or mocking their beliefs does not mean that one is mocking all people with mental disabilities.

He is willingly participating in this thread with the same personality and limitations he has done for years in a variety of forums here, and when he gets mocked for not understanding a forum with his bizarre threads - are they mocking someone with a mental disability?

I don't think he takes this thread seriously, nor should he. Nobody should. He is obviously a lonely geezer who still plays poker, and likely does not make anything from it by this point, but what else is he going to do. Threads like this help fill his life, so in a weird way we are actually helping him get some satisfaction.

Will he ever have common sense or understand basic math or logic? Of course not, as that is not within his DNA, but who cares - take him for what he is, nothing more, or if interaction with him troubles you then choose not to interact.

This directly contradicts many of your posts and is just backpedaling. Would you like me to quote them?

Yes. Trends are one things streaks are another thing so please do quote me. I would love to see them.

You have yet to define what a streak or trend is to you, but assuming he does provide some quotes - perhaps, after being confused by his post, you can come up with a third word you will not define! I would suggest that "progression" or "movement" would work, but if you want to keep it simple (and you always do) then go with "swing" which is also a bit of a poker term.

At that point you can have trends, streaks and swings, all of which have no specific definition in your world.

All the best.

U know nothing about me dude. U have no idea how old i am, no idea whst I do in life, no idea how much money I have, or how much I win or lose with poker. I guarantee i have worked less in less then u have do to good financial decisions. To make yourself feel better u can write out your thoughts here. If it makes u feel like u are doing better then someone then have at it. I have no complaints in life and I am not lonely at all. I consider myself to be very fortunate. Maybe u can't say the same or maybe u can., thst is up to u to decide. Take a deep look inside and see whst really makes you happy. Read about different things. Experience different things in life. Don't assume u know anything about anyone else. People may have thoughts and opinions thst differ from yours...and thst is fine. It does not make them lonely or stupid. I am telling u what I see with onljne poker, your experience could be different and if it is then congrats.

Indeed that is exactly what you (or "u") did, and hopefully I helped you find the courage to do so, which may give you some satisfaction in your situation during those later years.

Anyway, back to your recent streak/trend/swing theory - you continue to avoid defining them, perhaps out of fear of some kind. It will be up to you to overcome that fear and have the confidence to stand behind one of your proposals. Perhaps try as you debate math with some of the other posters in the thread.

All the best.

Define what? A streak. It's a streak. U are looking for something stupid like saying too many flushes or something. I don't care what the steak is. It's a streak. Debate math during a streak then tell us the sample is too small. What type of things are u guys looking for. U be date thst people run hot or cold in poker. U debate thst steaks exist. U debate debate everything. Thst fact is those things exist. If they did not moneymaker yang Raymer gold would have never win the main event. With our the streaks they went on they would have never won. U can look at it anyway u like.
Try to make your day better. No need to criticise people to make yourself feel better. U want to have a conversation then fine. I truly think u enjoy degrading people.
The only person that can change how u feel about your self is you. Good luck

You were the one yammering on about "streaks" of underdogs and favorites in all-ins.

The question is not hard - how many are in a streak? 2? 4? 100?


How many times in a row is it for something to be a streak?


This is all your imaginary theory, so it is up to you to define the terms. AS you said

You have yet to define what "many times in a row" even means. 3? 5? 100? Pick a number if you dare!

I kept that as simple as possible, though I know it will be of no use in having you understand or answer the direct question.

All the best.

Pick a number ok. I will do something u would love to see. Tuesdays it's 5 in a row. Wednesdays it's 9 in a row. Saturdays it's 12 in a row.

Hey, its your weird riggie theory, not mine, so for it to be tested you do need to define what a "streak" is when asking people to look for them and see if they "happen too often" as you claim to notice (with of course you having no idea how often they should happen).

Assume the average favorite hand is 60% (since you have yet to define that on any day in your little Tuesday/Thursday whatever thing) then it would be quite possible to determine the following

How many "streaks" of losing/winning (ie a favorite loses x in a row then wins x in a row or also wins x in a row then loses x in a row) should happen in a 100 sample size when on

Tuesday it needs to be 5+ wins followed by 5+ losses or 5+ losses followed by 5+ wins

Wednesday it needs to be 9+ wins followed by 9+ losses or 9+ losses followed by 9+ wins

Saturday it needs to be 12+ wins followed by 12+ losses or 12+ losses followed by 12+ wins


A math guy can consume sometime to show the odds of the following would be in a 100 sample size, but I would be confident in saying that your Wednesday and Saturday streaks would be extremely, and for Saturday almost impossibly rare, so indeed if that is your theory then it would be easy to test (or prop bet that you will not follow up on) on a Saturday to see if streaks happen too much.


I realize none of this makes any sense to you at all, and you just wanted to say you see streaks too much without even knowing what that means, so I am not detailing this with any expectation that you will understand anything, rather I am doing it because it amuses me for the moment. Hope that helps, and be sure to catch that Early Bird Special near you before it is too late!


All the best.

I started to filter my PFAIs to investigate jungmit's claims and got bored after like 30 seconds. I saw like 2 hands out of 20 where the worse hand won so maybe I'm the fish it's rigged for.

Yu gys are so ful f shyt. streak is streak. do'nt u get tat ? stop botering me with liyng math.

He makes it clear that rigs like this do not target a specific player, rather they simply exist for the sake of existing, even though they make no money for the site, nor apparently accomplish anything. Why would math factor into that?

Anyway, hopefully some new, genuine riggies will appear and the clown intermission show will step aside until needed again in the future.

I am pretty sure that in his mind the rig benefits the sites. How ? I'm pretty sure that he doesn't know that either. If he claims that the so called "streaks" happen just for the sake of happening then I don't know what to say. Maybe he believes that it is a sick joke being pulled by the sites because it humors them seeing "streak" after "streak". If what you say is true then I hope for his sake that he is trolling. A poor attempt at it, I must say.

Jungmit, can you please elaborate on why do you think the sites incorporate these "streaks" ?

He is not trolling, as he has posted just like this for years in a variety of forums and threads that have zero trolling. He is basically saying it exists for the sake of existing, and he is the first one to point out it is just what he observes (then he asks others to see if they notice it). He pretty much never gives a reason for a rig. It simply exists because he thinks he has seen it. That's it. Pointing out that many of his rigs literally accomplish nothing will have no impact, because he believes what he thinks he has seen.

Many of his theories follow this type of pattern, which is why I chuckle when people genuinely try to explain the math of his rig of the moment to him in a reasonable manner.

Well, then I must agree with you. After surfing through this thread and seeing some pretty amusing stuff ( to say at least ), I really hope that another crazy guy like that "laser beam riggie" comes along. Those posts were pure gold.

Hi, was a theory that pokersite would like to keep all deposits as rake for them selfs debunked? As pokerstars now will cut rakeback completly what could stop them to rigge rng in favor of most loosing players to at least lessen withdraws? How many hands do one need to prove rng is rigged. I 99% sure rng is not rigged at least on stars, but if I were desperate to increase my profits as stars are now I would like deposits to last as long as they can and turn them all to rake. So helping most loosing players make sense.

Why would that be debunked, of course in an ideal world this is what sites would want to happen. Well given that they're cutting rakeback after already increasing rake multiple times I'd guess what's stopping them is an inability to rig it undetectably, or obviously they'd have done that first.

Since you 99% sure that it is rigged you must have some pretty good evidence. 99% is almost 3 sigma so can't wait to see that data.

You should learn to read first, then demand data

Išsiųsta naudojantis HTC One_M8 Tapatalk 4 Lt