Several years ago the riggies where at least as many as today. I suspect there were even more. They were more vocal.

People that lose at any game will shout rigged. Do you like to lose ? In poker if you lose, you do not only lose the game, you lose money. So it's only natural that people get more upset when they lose.

Look at football/soccer: In the 70/80's Liverpool were dominating the English League. A lot of people said that the referees were on their side ( the games were rigged for them ). Since the early 90's until 2013, Manchester United ruled the English League. People said that the referees were on their side.

For me its just gambling at the moment and I kind of accept that right now.

I mean most of my money comes form suckouts and coolers, just maybe 10 % or less comes from actual mistakes.
Even if people are making mistakes and have leaks most of the time they either get away with it or the amount the lose is so small compared to rest of the hands that its basically irrelevant.

For me its like one time I beat the game with 20-30 bb/100 the next time I play I lose the same amount.
The difference between being lucky and unlucky is just way to big for me.
My results dont improve or change anymore, it doesnt matter how much content or how many coachings I watch.
The times where I watched coachings or read content and improved improved my results are over.
Right now I can barley beat the worse of the worse.
Sure I constantly try to improve my game and watch all the coaching videos I can get, read the hand reviews but it makes no real or significant difference.
I just do it to keep myself entertained and it motivates me to play, but it doesnt improve my results.

You're doing the equivalent of listening to your math teacher and then not doing your homework. That's not how you study.

For me its just there is no way I am ever going to beat anything like NL10 or higher over a long term.

There is no money for me in Poker if I flip burger for one day I would make more then in one week playing poker.

It is just unrealistic to think otherwise according to my current situation and how much better I have to play then my opponent to cover the variance.
Right now I play against players who are unbelievable bad for over a year and barley make a buck.
Even if I would improve tremendously it would not be enough to beat someone who has a slightest clue.

Come on dude, NL 2 to NL 10 are easy to beat. You just have to play a solid game, no intricate bluffs as you'll get called more often than a telemarketer will call you and you'll make money. The problem is that the money you'll make is significantly is basically crumbs considering the money you put at stake.

Those limits should only be used to build up a bankroll. The thing is that you'll need to have money spared for the time you are grinding those limits until you build it up ( which could take months ). I do agree that becoming a professional from scrap nowadays is way harder ( if not impossible ) than in the boom time period when you take all factors into consideration.

...this thread is 9 years old.

I have a way harder time playing right now NL5 then NL50 in 2010.
Back then I was also beating NL5 and NL10 with constant with 10-18 BB/100 on 12 Tables.
Right now 4 Tables NL2 with less then 5 bb/100.

I also tried just play tight and solid, like Vpip 18 WTSD 25 A 3.0 style, doesnt work for me I dont connect enough to go to SD and my SD-Winnings wont cover my loses.
I have to steal pots to make a profit I dont get dealt enough winning hands.

Poker has gotten harder over the past 7 years, yes. Sounds like you're trying to play an older strategy that's been overtaken by newer strategies.

Do you think you would be successful following the strategy laid out in Super/System? Why or why not? This puts you in the exclusive company of literally everyone. Everyone gets dealt the same starting hands, some are able to profit through their skills.

Are you playing profesionally ? If yes, how much volume do you put in?

What you mean ?
Did I used to play professionally ?
How much Volume I put in back then ?
Back then it was like 100-150 k Hands Samples on NL5 and NL10 each with a rate of around 14BB/100 and a pretty constant rate every 10-15 k it was above 8 bb/100.

If you meant current according to this comment

"I also tried just play tight and solid, like Vpip 18 WTSD 25 A 3.0 style, doesnt work for me I dont connect enough to go to SD and my SD-Winnings wont cover my loses.
I have to steal pots to make a profit I dont get dealt enough winning hands."

It was like last two years and was like 200-300k Hands.
Lost like 25 Stacks a year but still went little bit above even because of the rakeback.
This year I threw it out and play looser than this.
And made at least 100 $ over 180 k Hands on NL2.

I tried to move up to NL5 but it seems kind of impossible, this week switch back and forth, NL5 was minus 30bb/100 and NL2 was plus 25 BB/100.
On NL2 was super lucky and on NL5 totally unlucky, its just weird.

There is nothing weird here in terms of your results. You played in the last two years what regs play in a couple months. It is 2017, not 2010 (which is your biggest problem). Rigging has nothing to do with your situation, your game is very outdated, that's all, and the competition, particularly from countries where grinding the nanos can make a living is much harder than it used to be when you played long ago.

It is not like online poker is the only field where a lack of keeping up has an impact. That is true in pretty much all competitive fields, particularly online ones. You may have been a top user of myspace in the day, guess what that does for you now.

Play if you enjoy it, and accept that you may make a little or lose a little, though the good old days are gone. If your goal is to pursue poker as a source of consistent income - to be blunt - nothing in your posts suggests you are ready or capable of that for the year 2017 and beyond. That is not an insult, it is a reality check. If you grasp at pointless riggie theories to help validate your situation then you will just cost yourself money. Choice is yours in the end.

All the best.

As Monteroy pointed out, your volume is not big enough.

Also, it's hard to make a living from micro's and if you don't have money on the side to support yourself while building up and learning, well.. then it's pretty much impossible.

Have you ever considered joining a coaching site ? It does miracles for most. It will cost you some money but the return on investment could be very favorable.

Like I said I dont think I will make a living out of poker.
If I cant beat the micros with the amount I put into right now there is noway that I will make serious money out of it.
Also the future doesn't look bright, the playerpool is in continuous decline and the rake is getting higher.

At the moment I am using free content from pokerstrategy.com, pokerschool online and on youtube.
It should be enough to cover the micros.
I used to have cardrunners and bluefire it really helped me back then but right now it just makes no sense to pay for something like that.
My issue is not that I have problems with regs my issue is that I have even trouble with pure gamblers and beginners.
I have problems even with players who make obvious mistakes and have obvious leaks.
Like I told a friend from my "study-group", my problem from moving up where that the opponents got to loose, I was losing to people who where calling me down with gutshots and bottompairs.

Then you should seriously consider quitting it.

You definitely have some leaks that you fail to see because it's impossible to lose money in 200k hands if you were getting it in only as a favorite on the flop with your opponents holding gutshots or bottom pairs.

From what you say you have two options: really devote yourself to improving through every means possible or quit. You'll never be able to sustain yourself from the micro's, especially if you can't beat them.

Nahh you miss understood me or I explained it bad.
I dont mean I always get it in like that.
I mean people who have leaks like that and also call you down with really crappy hands, where you see people making several obvious misplays.

There I often get session where I still get annihilated, I barley connect and miss my draws cant get them to fold lose a lot nonSD, then they hit 2-3 times and I am stuck over 3 stacks.
Those are the worst if you get a downswing.

Right now NL2 is easy money for me but to move up is impossible.
I run like **** and get super loose opponents.
Last year I had the same problem moving up to NL10.

Could be, but it has nothing to do with this thread.

No, it's not concerning in the least, because nowhere is anyone saying that 1 out of 3 members of this poker forum think the games are rigged. That's just your bad interpretation of the poll results.

Why?

Not only could one "argument" it, it's an extremely logical conclusion.

In a community of 5 or 10, maybe. On 2+2, it was likely in the thousands.

That ratio could well be right, both then and now.

Yes, there was. A very large one.

As others have pointed out, this thread has been around for 9 years. It was created because people kept starting new threads about the same thing, so we started merging the threads. This kind of thing had already been going on for years then.

I just clicked on our "Archives" link, and then chose the first link under Internet Poker, and was brought to this:

http://www.twoplustwo.com/digests/in...eb00_main.html

That's from February 2000. If you go through other months, you'll see multiple discussion about it.

There have always been, and will always be, a certain percentage of people who think online poker is rigged. I've seen nothing to convince me that percentage has shifted much over the years.

If you want to improve your game, you should be reading and posting here:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...ers-questions/

And FWIW, while this poll is extremely unscientific, you seem to put some stock into it, so I thought you might find this post from 2010 interesting:

The numbers are now at just under 35% saying yes (34.83) - a substantial decrease.

Also, that is over 25,000 posts into this thread, and we're now over 83,000 which I think is somewhat interesting for two reasons.

First of all, if one assume that the ratio of posts:votes has remained steady throughout the years, that would mean the yes votes would have to have been only ~33.5% in the intervening time period. And I would suggest that the ratio of posts:votes should have increased, as there will be more people that continue posting who have already voted, which would mean the % voting yes recently would have to be even lower.

Secondly, that's 25,000 posts in the first 2 years, and 58,000 in the last 7 years. Increase in the thread is decreasing, not increasing, which would seem to fly in the face of your observations/speculation. Of course traffic in our forum in general has also dropped over that time period, but not enough that it supports your assertion that more people think poker is rigged now.

Of course this is all very unscientific, and I'd caution drawing any hard and fast conclusions from these numbers. But they make me feel more confident in my observations than in yours.

Most likely if I would have to guess myself right now what my problem is.
I would say I have a tilt issue.
It is kind of hard to start from the bottom again.
To have the patients and focus.

I am quiet good in theory or lets just say good enough for those stakes.
Most of the content I read and the videos I watch are already familiar to me.
Because I heard and saw it so many times before on previous ones.
I think I have enough knowledge to beat it but I lack in discipline and focus to make the right plays and think clearly.
I tempt to get inpatient if I hit a dry spot and do not have the hands to just run over my opponents.
I am good when I get momentum but I am horrible if I have to slow down.
That are obvious signs of tilt.

If you want to get better, stay away from this thread. Bobo pointed you in the beginner's forum. There are threads when you can post hands and ask for opinions on how you played them. Do that.

If you have tilt issues, there is a psychology forum, I'm pretty sure there is some advice on tilt control there. I would also recommend Jared Tendler's books, the mental game part I and II.

In regards to your leaks, it really helps if you have somebody better than you at the game and analyze your play. Sometimes it's hard to be objective when analyzing yourself.

You won't find much help in here in regards to the issues mentioned above.

Do you think a world beater, such as Daniel Cates or Ivey, would crush NL200 6max or HU today, on a US site (Ignition, ACR)?

Daniel Cates plays 25/50 and up on Stars which has the toughest games. I'm pretty sure he would. I'm pretty sure Ivey would as well.

NVG is

<----------

thataway.

It's actually relevant to this thread in that if you think poker is rigged and/or just luck in the long run. Imagining that it's either or both, how a top pro would fair actually helps reduce the possibility that poker is rigged or luck.

Wow, that's sure a convoluted way of justifying an off-topic post. It wasn't a big deal, just letting you know where discussion of your post belongs. If you want to talk about poker being rigged, you don't need to disguise it.

How a top pro has fared could be a point for or against a site being rigged. Asking how they would fare in the context of this thread is just another way of asking if someone thinks it's rigged.

Also regulating and licencing would be a big deal.
So there is no grey area and its a 100% legit business.

I think Howard Lederer and Ray Bitar ****ed online poker big time.
What went down on FTP was really bad for the general reputation.