So, long term people love playing poker to lose money ?

Usually players ( mostly bad players ) complain about action hands and claim there are too many. Of course, math contradicts them. But that's not the point.

The point is that your silly rig will decrease the site volume as most people don't deposit an infinite amount of time. If the site "helps" them bust their deposit faster, they will eventually stop playing and a lot of the money that they lost will get withdrawn by the players that won it.

They don't need to make online poker more exciting as the speed and dynamics of it are already enough. When you play online, the fact that you are in the comfort of your house and doing whatever the hell you are doing besides playing much faster than live, makes you disregard and not notice the boring hands. When you play live and have to sit minutes almost every time for each hand makes each hand much more noticeable as your brain cannot go fully idle during the playing time. But of course, I maybe wrong since I'm starting to have doubts about yours.

This is asssimf "they" always have the worst of it when all in which of course "they"wont

So, your theory is that they give setups more often than normal to POSSIBLY have people play longer because it's exciting to have cooler after cooler after cooler ( and by this they do not make more money ) and yet somehow keeping the distribution of the cards to appear normal ? Sounds easy to do.

It doesn't matter if they don't have the worst of it when all in all the time. Bad players or fish still go bust even if the site were to help them last a few more ( and again we go back to math that tells us that the site is limited in this regard because they cannot have the fish win too much than normal as that will show up in the databases ). So, again, this is not worth the time for the site.

And how does a site place somebody under the "fish" category ? And if the site places someone under the "fish" category, they never go out of it ? And if they do, how do they do it ? There are countless examples of players that were bad when they started and as time passed they improved and they got better results. There are also countless examples of players that were bad when they started and have remained bad throughout the course of their playing history.

Do you or do you not agree that if any site were to do this for any significant amount, it will show up in the databases ?

And more importantly. Does this stuff come out of your butt hole ? Did you look at some databases and saw something out of the ordinary ?

The fact that you seem to press the keyboard with your nose is because of auto correct function ( which is still worrying as it is beating you heavily ) or do you randomly enjoy creating words ?

"assimf" = the new abbreviation of assuming

[QUOTE=jungmit;52460561]

I Just can't understand how you cannot understand that by having big hands go up against each other "more often than they should" it would shift the distribution of the cards dealt and be noticeable in any meaningful sample size. To keep the card distribution correct there would HAVE to be super long stretches of nobody having hands and nobody getting all in. Therefore defeating the purpose of your rigged theory, and is actually what tends to happen thru normal random chance anyways.

To summarize your theory is impossible without seeing some kind of deviation in the hands dealt. Nobody needs to see any evidence or millions of hands to understand this FACT.

[QUOTE=Pots-For-Sale;52461098]
Tht is assimf ey ont even t out by havg big hnds wyn te percntags ey shld.

Extreme example number 2......sites don't need to know if u are a fish or not.
Deal AK vs qq at the same time. Neither player is folding 50-50 in the long run. Who cares who getsnrhe AK or the qq. Money is going in. 50-50 nice and even.

[QUOTE=Pots-For-Sale;52461098] Bingo. U got it...which brings us to the streaks theory. I truly think u guys are getting this. I have hopes.

[QUOTE=jungmit;52461249]
God, you're mentally ******ed, aren't you ?

The poster that you were quoting was dismissing and not approving your theory.

Forget your stupid streak theory.

What you are saying is that the distribution is random and yet somehow it's rigged. Both cannot be true.

You just told someone that said your theory is a pile of dung that indeed he got it. In theory that would mean you also think your theory is wrong. However, you did mess up quoting him and managed to quote yourself while doing so, so perhaps that cancels out you saying you agree when he said your theory was stupid. Two wrongs make a right in the end, and if doing so makes the site no money then you probably will believe in that as well.

Here is a hand where I folded while getting 350-1ish pot odds. I hope this helps with whatever your theory of the moment is:

PokerStars Game #45386137036: Tournament #315010645, $10+$1 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XV (1000/2000) - 2010/06/11 20:15:16 ET
Table '315010645 86' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: rh300487 (76737 in chips)
Seat 2: Marlboro3man (21456 in chips)
Seat 3: Monteroy (36109 in chips)
Seat 4: Bremzki (2248 in chips)
Seat 5: machetetooth (119076 in chips)
Seat 7: GmoneyWP15 (102777 in chips)
Seat 8: putte913 (23434 in chips)
Seat 9: wales64 (76448 in chips)
rh300487: posts the ante 200
Marlboro3man: posts the ante 200
Monteroy: posts the ante 200
Bremzki: posts the ante 200
machetetooth: posts the ante 200
GmoneyWP15: posts the ante 200
putte913: posts the ante 200
wales64: posts the ante 200
Marlboro3man: posts small blind 1000
Monteroy: posts big blind 2000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Monteroy [5h 7c]
Bremzki: calls 2000
machetetooth: folds
GmoneyWP15: folds
putte913: folds
wales64: calls 2000
rh300487: folds
Marlboro3man: calls 1000
Monteroy: checks
*** FLOP *** [Tc Qs 4s]
Marlboro3man: checks
Monteroy: checks
Bremzki: checks
wales64: checks
*** TURN *** [Tc Qs 4s] [2s]
badbeatalday is connected
Marlboro3man: checks
Monteroy: checks
Bremzki: bets 48 and is all-in
wales64: calls 48
Marlboro3man: calls 48
Monteroy: folds
*** RIVER *** [Tc Qs 4s 2s] [3s]
Marlboro3man: checks
wales64: checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Marlboro3man: shows [5s 4h] (a flush, Queen high)
Bremzki: mucks hand
wales64: shows [7s 8s] (a flush, Queen high - Eight higher)
wales64 collected 9744 from pot
Bremzki finished the tournament in 221st place and received $75.00.


All the best.

Can you all please stop raping the word "theory"? You're really destroying its meaning. The word you're looking for is "hypothesis".

In this case the word we're looking for is cuckoo bananas.

I was just in LV for a few weeks to play live cash games and tournaments and I had noticed something is really wrong. I have never seen so many bad beats in poker before. Every poker room I played all I saw was the same group of nonminority who keep winning day after day which is so unreal. It seems like the equipments in poker rooms are totally a setup. If you do research you know how equipment works. If you google "Ben Joffe the cold deck" you get idea how this software works. Imagine if poker rooms use this software and install into their equipments, that would be disaster. Research you will know the equipment also works with wireless. Why would the equipment have to interface with wireless? Make absolutely no sense. I don't want to debate because I already have all facts.* There is no way the equipment is legit.* Some of the things I had witnessed seem too good to be true.
This year I also noticed poker rooms use plastic cards instead of paper cards. When I asked employees they said plastic cards are durable which is true but if you look it up there is science behind plastic cards. They can put microchips in the cards which is invisible to your naked eyes. The plastic card the delear uses to protect the bottom of the deck is also made of plastic and I am pretty sure it is not just blank plastic but there is microchip in it they can manipulate the deck somewhere in the casino. I am thinking if they can see your hold cards they have ability to control the outcome they can make you win or lose.

As far as hand shuffle goes I even saw a lot more setup hands with plastic cards. This makes me to believe the deck is rigged too. Why would poker rooms rig the game when we play against each other? Because they are greedy even though they make so much money collecting rakes and tournament fees. I trully believe that the main reason they rig live poker is in favour of nonminority and they really want to make minority lose money. They are targeting minority because they don't want minority to have nothing. I am saying Asians and Blacks are number 1 target. Sad but true. If you are minority unless you play table games like bacarrat or blackjack with biggest habits chances are they may favor you because they want you to win money in poker then lose all money back to the house.* If you play in a room where they have badbeat jackpot when it gets big they will setup for their house players to collect jackpot.

Tips: Don't play against Indian guys even they are minority because I think they are the ones who write the software for poker rooms they know algorithm. Poker rooms may favor them you cannot beat them. You may have a chance to win if you find a minority table. Don't ask me to prove anything because base of my scientific observation and many years of experience in poker it can be proven.* I believe the reason people play poker because they enjoy the game they want to have fun and win money.* No one is stupid and blind forever. They can trick you once or twice but if they keep doing it sooner you will find out that you have been cheated you will never come back. Poker is supposed to be a game of skill and now they turn into rigged game.* From now on I boycott both live cash games and tournaments because not only I lose money but my time. Will play again until I make sure they offer fair and square game for ppl.* I just think the way poker rooms rig the game is so wrong. Digusting!! Disgrace!!* Shame to the game!!!* Everybody SHOULD be equal no matter what race you are. When ppl lose to a fair and square game they have nothing to say. Don't waste your time and breath to convince them you know for the fact they would lie to the teeth and deny everything. Poker rooms MUST stop rigging the game now!!!

MOD please do not delete this post. People need to read it to understand what is going on

Yes.

Of course? Where have you been? It's been this way for years. They made Qui Nguyen win the main event last year to reduce suspicion. Too many people were on to the plot

This thread always gets boring once jungmit takes over with his nonsense, so as a special treat I resurrected a live riggie thread that was deleted in NVG, and merged it here. Enjoy!

He's already banned though. Nonetheless what a pile of feces it is possible for one human to write down, amazing.

Oh, man. Why did you ban him ? He has/had potential.

It was an NVG mod that did.

Can't say as I blame them.

C+ gimmick/troll.

I have no rigged theory just one statement to make. Anyone who asks the question why would an online site manipulate the outcome of a hand is either an %#$#%$ or is trying to cover up something. Seeing that I believe that most of you guys are pretty smart and are not %$#$#% then it appears that you intelligent gents are trying to cover something up. There are a handful of obvious reasons why a site would manipulate the outcome of a hand you know it. So to sit here and act like someone is moronic for believing that a poker site would benefit from rigging the rng is manipulation in its own right.

I hope you keyboard warriors have a ball with this.

You're not interesting, go away.

Can we unban the racist live riggie please?

Really no need to be a keyboard warrior to respond to this. You're making what is effectively a straw man argument - you're arguing against a point of view that basically no one has expressed. I don't think anyone ITT has posted that there is no way a site could benefit from rigging hands. If they have, they're wrong, of course.

What is often argued is that it would be too difficult for a site to do so without being detected, and/or that the risk isn't worth the reward.

When you have threads like this and a community of ppl that seem to make it their life mission to protect these sites from any possibility of software manipulation or really any wrong doing it just appears to me that the objective is to cover up. So you said that it would basically be ridiculous for these sites to increase the margin by manipulating the rng and I say what do they have to worry about when they have threads like this with ppl who appear to want to protect them at any cost?

With all due respect you are a keyboard warrior. 44,553 post will confirm that.

That actually isn't what I said - I was telling you what arguments have been used in this thread.

I think there is a point to be made about sites not having to worry about covering up, but not for the reason you've said. I think it's rather silly to think that if real evidence came to light, that a few regulars in this thread would be able to magically cover it up. Aside from the fact that the information is all here for everyone to see no matter how many people argue against it, there's also the more important point that such evidence would quickly find its way into a stand-alone thread and if credible, would find plenty of traction - remember AP/UB?

I think the argument to be made, and it has been by some, is that sites wouldn't have to worry about consequences as there isn't much in the way of solid regulation to hold them accountable, and that lots of people would continue playing. Hearkening back to the AP/UB example again, there is some validity to that argument - many people did keep playing after the superuser scandal, and I don't think any of the guilty parties faced much in the way of significant consequences. But I don't entirely agree with the argument, as it definitely hurt the sites' bottom lines, as I think it would with any site that was found to have a rigged RNG. But that's not to say that a site might not look at the overall risk/reward ratio and decide that it really is worth it - whether they're correct or not. That's why I've always thought it's good for players to be vigilant about keeping an eye on sites, but it's equally important not to be crying wolf all the time as so many do when they don't get the results they think they should.

Um, OK. I had always thought of a "keyboard warrior" as someone who is angrily raging at everyone from behind the safety of their computer screen. I guess we either understand the term differently, or you have a much different image of me than reality.

Just saw this addition. Apparently we do have different understandings of the term.

For a site like WPN what risk are you speaking of? Oh yea maybe i will take my Texas butt over to Poker Stars. Wait a minute I can't!! WPN has zero risk because its main player base has no other choice which you are fully aware. That means that at least at WPN that is not an argument.