No point, no case to prove, no thing but avoid thoughts burping out silly claims.

As a poker player, I am cheated if the site has a shady operation. I'm more than capable of seeing aberrations in my HH. I have players/groups with far more knowledge than I will ever aspire to attain and if they saw an any issues on or about a site they'd be gone in a flash. Not only that, it would make me look stupid.

Almost, yet not quite, as bad as making a stupid claim that makes no sense nor would post evidence of their claim. Instead, they opt for making even dumber posts lashing out at others when they are outed as being a bit.......stupid.

You ever find out why they 3 bet so much on ACR? You're a tater head and the reality is you just suck at poker.

How the **** would I know why they 3 bet on ACR so often? Maybe two players colluding to squeeze an innocent.

Enjoy your sleezy rakebake scheme making pennies. Maybe someday you can get a real job.

People like you would not know, nor make any effort to study to discover why opponents behave in the way they do, instead resorting to standard whining and paranoid beliefs as rationalizations.

That is why riggies and whiners like you are the prey of this industry, and on behalf of all predators, we appreciate your continued patronage at the tables. You can moan and complain and hurl boring insults all you like ( I suggest someone like you use eyerolling ones ones like scum and or sleeze bucket), as long as riggies like you continue to play. Thanks!

All the best.

Prey of the industry lmao. Stfu sleezebucket

We both believe that your reply is perfect, though for completely different reasons.

All the best.

And whose second account are you, moron?

Who cares as long as they keep playing.

I’m flattered you tards think I’d create a second account to communicate with you.

Who cares, as long as you keep playing.

All the best.

Was it to change your vote from being Undecided?

There's only two reasons to post their rigged anecdotes on a public forum. Either to blow off some steam, or to warn people/try to bring the site down. If it's the former, then their job is done. If it's the latter, they're much more likely to be successful if they provide some evidence to go with their story.

Why wouldn't someone want to post their evidence, if they already went to the trouble to post their story?

You wouldn't know why because you have the dumb. You blame your failing on the table with some magical rig that has no evidence but some really big feelz.

You're a taterhead, sucky poker player, and abysmal debater/litigator. Please, with all sincerity, do not leave the tables. We may laugh at you here in the thread but welcome you with open arms on the felt.

I do appreciate you're concern for my financial well being. So you can rest easy, I stopped working about a decade ago. Running a hedge fund left me somewhat comfortable in life and now I spend my time with my wife and kids, some consulting work, and poker.

To point out, one last time, how potato you are, in life too, the affiliate business would be toast if it was provable that poker networks cheated players. The networks would be gone. The biggest are publicly traded and undergo annual audits. You're feelz are meaningless. Your attempt at insults is juvenile. Your appearance in a poker room is very very welcomed.

PokerNV, how goes your case building against online poker sites? I know you can't divulge actual evidence on here in case the poker sites see it and start building a defense, but are you in the late stages of development? Will you be bringing your litigation to a federal court? Cheers

Yeah, no one would ever do such a thing...oh wait.

No, nothing so devious. Riggy is my son. I'm 48 years old.

As you can read..my posts have been pretty much against the whole conspiracy theory thing.

Been a while since we had a father/son bit, but the last time the person also logged into a third account by mistake, and when asked if grandparents were involved he did admit (to noone's shock) that he was indeed the same person.

Regardless, be sure to vote multiple times in the riggie poll, as the riggie side needs all the help it can get.

All the best.

Hahahha Ok.

He/they already has/have, but it wasn't as helpful to the "riggie side" as you might have expected:

For someone who doesn't like conspiracy theories, you sure seem eager to embrace them.

Look dude, I had no idea you were even still around. So it definitely wasn't some kind of personal attack to post that link.

You and all the "anti-riggy" closed minded posters keep saying "do your research". I did my research. I posted it. And that's that.

If the article had said that a mathematical genius was responsible for taking down AP I'd be fine with that. It wouldn't change my opinion that today's poker sites have flawed RNGs. And quite frankly, the link shouldn't change your opinions either.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Where are you seeing a conspiracy theory here?

Either one guy has used two accounts in this thread (wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last), or he and his son each have their own accounts, and son posted with dad's account by accident. No big deal. And no conspiracy. Sorry to disappoint you. But, it was a mildly amusing mistake he/they made, and we're having a little fun with it.

Where please, is your research that shows today's poker sites have flawed RNGs?

It seems a lot more likely that today's true hardware RNGs are better than they were 10-20 years ago when people had to code PRNG's and could make mistakes. No big site does that anymore, and the hardware ones can't be modified. They are just a black box that spits out random numbers. So if sites are dealing unfairly it isn't the RNG, it's deliberate cheating by ignoring the RNG. So you either believe that or not, but they aren't accidentally "flawed".

But again, where did you post that research please?

His father will answer that later.

Has this been posted ITT yet? I know it's from 2017, but I just saw it in BBV. This guy has basically written a whole book on whether Stars is rigged...

https://www.academia.edu/34059393/On...udy_Pokerstars

I tried to skim it but pretty much stopped reading here:

"Now, under any normal circumstances, there actually should be no debate andnothing for me to research, since any, and I repeat, any IT specialist will tell you there simply is no such thing as a (truly, genuinely) "random" number generator. Any software operating with such an algorithm is conceived by a human mind, which makes it by default anything,but random. What players should expect at best is a pseudo-random distribution of cards."

This is 100% not true. Hardware RNGs are truly random as they rely on quantum events. Additionally, even software RNGs can collect entropy from sources that are essentially random, such as users' mouse movements. His thesis is already pretty flawed based on that statement alone.

Always count on an academic to be hopelessly wrong in the most eloquent way imaginable.