Well like we were saying, there are obvious differences between live and online that can at least somewhat account for this even if we assume that everything is 100% legit. More bad players chasing hands they shouldn't means more bad beats when the same percentage of those hands hit. The thing that made me suspicious was the timing and the frequency.

The same beats but in what seems like more random timing probably wouldn't have made me think a thing of it. But when I consistently build and then once I'm up a good amount I suddenly hit a flurry of multiple awful bad beats then this happens several times like clockwork that's what makes me wonder if I can trust it.

I didn't expect so much hostility back and forth on these forums about it though, but I guess I understand that if you feel cheated you'd be angry about it and if you feel it's just a matter of bad players making excuses then it would get more than a little annoying by the 3422nd page. Good formula for a lot of hostility I suppose.

In percentage terms, if you define a bad beat as being when a 95% chance of winning is beaten by the guy having a 5% chance of winning, the bad beat will happen 5 times in every 100 hands. So in 300 hands you'll see that bad beat happen 15 times, online or live. (Except, of course, you don't usually actually see the loser's hand in a live game unless the players are all in.)

What is your definition, in percentage terms, of a bad beat? Please also give an example pair of hands.

I mean a pocket pair of 7s on a paired (4's) board sounds like a pretty high equity spot. Sounds like you're playing above your head, or something. Idk I'm not really convinced your post isn't a level of some level


Loled at the s/n tho

I had pocket fours on the button and someone(turns out the pocket sevens) raised to 3x in early position and got three callers ahead of me. They all had deep stacks so it was a solid opportunity to play the 4's as a drawing hand with good implied odds. Got a 4AQ rainbow flop so obviously about as good as I could hope for. Pocket sevens guy bet half pot, I raised him and he called. Turn was a 9 and he went all in. I called, river was a seven.

Bad luck. That only happens 4 times in every 100 similar hands.

Right, but that was just one example. Like I said, I only got suspicious when I was repeatedly getting a flurry of these hands in short times where the beat is just as(or close to) as bad and the play by the other guy is just as bad or close to it. I'm talking days of playing hours each day with your usual up and down but a steady profit, then when I get up pretty big I hit a flurry of three or more of these type hands in under an hour. It happened several times. That wouldn't make you at least a little suspicious?

Again, I obviously don't know and I'm not going to pretend to have some kind of evidence or anything, the most I have is clips of these hands and that obviously doesn't prove that it was anything more than just bad players and bad luck. It is enough though that, for me personally, I don't trust it enough to put more money in to it instead of going to the casino. If I do and it just happens again I'm going to feel real stupid for not trusting my suspicion.

Also as a side note, sure it was a 4% chance but it's not normally going to happen 4 times in every 100 similar hands because there isn't going to be 100 chances for it to happen, or anywhere close to it. Those pocket sevens are almost always folding when I raise on the flop, if they even bet it in the first place. They certainly aren't pushing all in on the turn often. It's not just the bad beat, it's the combination of the timing, the way it's played, and the bad beat that made me start to wonder if it can be trusted.

I'm not paranoid and I don't think "they" are targetting me to make me lose to make me redeposit. I think that if I thought they were targetting me to make me lose to make me redeposit, I wouldn't redeposit. That would fool their evil rig and I'm glad to hear that you're going to attempt to make yourself not look stupid by believing it exists and not taking any chances.

By the way, when people talk in percentage terms, they are not actually saying that a particular event will be repeated hundreds of times. I'm sure that even you realise that if a lottery tells you you have a 0.0001% chance to win their massive jackpot, you nor they believe you will buy a ticket a million times to (hopefully) win your fair share. It's simply a mathematical method of measuring how often something is likely to happen in the extreme long term of similar events, whether or not there is ever another similar event.

Actually, there have been a few groups that have tried at times to purchase every lottery combination when the jackpot was high enough. The risk of course is that they do not get all the combinations and one they missed wins, or a sequence of numbers comes up that will more likely have a lot of people picking it, thus splitting the jackpot into a smaller part that does not pay the investment. Those groups usually get a bit of media coverage when they try it, and no idea how they have done overall.

As to the dude who got 2 outed on the river - you remember that hand, because it stands out. You do not remember the same hand when they fold to you post flop or you win a larger pot. Then, likely due to your innate skill disadvantage, you eventually lose, and at that time you do not think about how you can work on your game to better compete, rather you think back to those cherry picked unlucky hands and attribute extra value to them. Then you get paranoid and suspicious, without really thinking why a site would target you for a 2 outer. It just "feels" wrong to you.

As others (and I) have said often - if you do not trust it then do not play it. If you do not trust it, but then continue to play it and lose (as that other riggie has done for decades) then you will not get much sympathy for your bad choices. In contrast, if you just want to learn more about the rich and vibrant riggie culture then click on the link I provided in my last post and read up about dozens of different riggies, and see if that helps you find your special place within the riggieverse.

All the best.

So we got more bad players chasing online? See this is there things don't add up. I then ask why winners have such small win rates on line......answer because players are better. So it can't be both. They can't be better and worse

More bad players chase in live games. Raise 10x the blinds and you often get 5 callers live. Try that even at 2NL online and most hands you will get 0-2 callers at most. Live games are much easier than online games. You are literally the only one who preaches that live games are harder, as even other riggies ignore that silly belief of yours. Players are in general better online than in live games, there is no disputing that, though you can continue to make up and believe anything you want.

In the end - if a player does not trust a game he is in (live or online) he should never play that game again. Very simple solution that almost no riggies seem able to follow, which is why having a little fun with riggies, and their inherently bad choices, is a fun time!

All the best.

How can they be better online, but the reason we See many so many bad beats is because they are bad and chase when they shouldn't ?
Also why goes having 5 callers make the game easier live ?

You play a lot more hands online. Even if you only play 2 tables at a time, you are playing 4-5x as many hands as you would play live in that same time. As well, given how you and riggies selectively remember bad beats and whatnot, you will have a larger number of hands for that to happen, so even if they happen at a lower rate - there will still be "more" beats than in a 20 hand per hour live game.

This does not even bother trying to get you or riggies to explain what seeing "too many" beats even means. You just say it, but you guys do not even know what the odds of something happening should be to make that judgment.

5 callers in a live game is easier because you can win a huge amount more when you hit a real hand, and given the low number of hands played - those huge pots make a massive difference. A full time live player can play maybe 1,500 hands in a full time week. An online grinder can play 25,000 hands in that time.

You are the only one who has the LOLbelief that live is harder than online. Literally nobody else seriously believes that, including riggies, so in the end you can decide if you are right or every other human who has ever played poker is correct.

I post all of the above fully knowing you will not understand it.

All the best.

$1 or $2 BB is the entry level live game that contains all the new and bad and occasional players. Online the 1/2 NL game is full of experienced pros who worked up to it from the dime and quarter stakes.

Are you still sticking with the story that you're losing because it is rigged and not simply because you have no idea how to play?

If you actually want to continue playing poker and not lose so much you should spend some time in Beginner's Questions.

You would be wrong again my fine feathered friend. I only play like 200 hands a day. So it's not anywhere near 4 to 5 hands more

I am not losing at all. I have posted a graph on here before. Was wining like 7bb-100

You meant to say 4-5 times more hands. Anyway, if you played that same amount of time live you would get in 50ish hands, and 200 is 4 times 50 (you may not understand that). Now, I would ask you this - if you see 2 bad beats in 50 hands live, and see 7 bad beats in 200 hands online - which format did you see a higher percentage of bad beats? I am guessing to you 7>2, or more likely you will not understand the question.

Also, you avoided the question of why you are literally the only one, including other riggies, who believes live poker is harder than online. You likely did not understand that as well.



Toss him a prop bet that will be escrowed by mail, and after that you can find another cherry picked sample to show. Been a while since you offered a prop bet that you will never do if someone accepts, so go for it.

Note, I fully realize that you will not understand the above post, and your answer, as always, will reflect that innate lack of comprehension. Part of the fun asking you when you appear in between riggies (seems the other ones poofed, and you usually show up after activity with other riggies ends) is seeing how you literally understand not a single post anyone makes to you. You probably do not understand that last sentence (or this one).

All the best.

You don't know that putting money into the pot with a bad hand is bad, so no, I don't believe that you are a winning player.

My fine feathered friend I play 500 hands per week live and 500 hands per week online. Obv I play those hands online in a shorter period of time

You quoted me in that absurd post completely out of context.

This is where you cut it off with the whole post below.

Get a hobby ffs going outside is healthier.

Just let me have the last word and don't make another long winded "all the best" post with wild presumptions about my state of mind that have no validity. I know you cant do that though as this thread is your domain and no one will ever get the better of you.

How could incherry pick a graph? The hands I play are the hands I play. Not sure how it could be doctored in any way. I think I am dumb but I am smart enough to doctor hold em manager some how ?
You should see my emails with the things I ask them to help with.
This sounds like u see more bad beats cuz players are bad and chase more. How come winners win less? Cuz players are better? Jahuh what ?????

So when you see 2 bad beats in an hour online and only 1 bad beat live in an hour, that proves to you that more bad beats happen online, right? Note, this is a trick question, but since you will not understand what that means I can say that knowing you will not figure out the simple trick.

True, it removed the whiny and lazy aspects from your post. Not sure why I did you that favor then. Good thing you follow me around so much to make sure everyone appreciates those innate qualities, but then since nothing said in this thread matters - good chance you will have to make that effort again in the future,since nobody will remember, nor care. Perhaps take that stalky energy and put it into bringing your game to a more competitive level for 2019.

Perhaps you will depending on how much you choose to continue to follow me around for that need of yours. I suppose politely what you do can be called a hobby, an indoor hobby.

You show hands played only on specific days, or for specific limits. Not that hard, even for you.

You probably do not understand what that means. Anyway, you are still the only one, including other riggies, who believes live is harder than online. Since you keep avoiding that point, I can only assume you do not understand it.

All the best.

Its not following you around when you quoted me. And the fact you think that post was whiny and lazy and not tongue in cheek sarcasm is amusing to say the least. I haven't reached rock bottom yet though. Thats when i am grinding 180 mans for you with you railing every hand. Save me a spot incase i lose 99% of my brain capacity in a horrible accident. Im sure you could game select for me in my diminished state to earn us both $1 a hour.

I quote all sorts of riggies in this thread, and I try to mix it up with some standard stuff along with the wacky stuff. With rare exception, I do not remember who is whom, but since this is so important to you, I assure you that the out of context part will not be posted in next year's list like it was in last year's list.

I strongly suggest you avoid multiple levels of sarcasm in a thread where nearly every riggie says their personalized crazy without a hint of sarcasm. If someone says they think it is rigged in a riggie thread, I assume they think it is rigged, because riggies are innately simple creatures.

The rest of your post was more standard stalky whining, but feel free to point out the subtle 7 layers of sarcasm in it if you like. No difference to me, since as you noted (perhaps sarcastically), nothing said in this thread matters.

I will ask you this - do you think online or live poker is generally harder?

All the best.

I can confirm there was no sarcasm at all. Please put it on the record that when all else fails and i have zero $ to my name your tinpot operation will be my first call.

Until that time yes i would be thankful if you don't quote me out of context again and i won't have to "follow" you to clear that up.

Tough one! let me give a serious answer to this.

Have played online poker for 12 ish years and its got worse every year. Sites take more and more rake, introduce new raketrap formats in mtts to reduce roi and increase the % of recs deposits going to the sites and people have just got better at poker. Its required to work alot harder for alot less returns than a few years ago and can only see the sky keep falling further slowly in future years.

Live poker is full of miserable old gits like you mont and they barely know the hand rankings.

Result: live poker is easier by a nose.

Well I was talking about as far as your earlier post where you were explaining the other guy's amount of bad beats he sees by making it out to be normal to see a 5% chance hit 15 times in 300 hands because, well, that comes out to 5%. You wouldn't normally see that though because unless the winning hand is well concealed you probably aren't going to see a lot of those 95%-5% hands played down to the end.

As far as the others talking about whether online or live is a higher skill level, I'd say it probably depends on where you play live. I'd say I see a higher percentage of clueless players online than at my nearest casino, but playing on the strip in Vegas I see more clueless players than online. Throwing out the strip and comparing my nearest casino to online, I'd agree that you're more likely live to see a bunch of callers pre-flop, but when I said chasing I was talking more about chasing a draw on the turn and/or river when you aren't getting the right odds. I think it seems like I see a lot more of that online, but that's just my experience and just off of memory rather than actually keeping track or anything.