Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition
View Poll Results: Is Online Poker Rigged?
Yes
3,503 34.88%
No
5,608 55.84%
Undecided
932 9.28%

06-08-2020 , 07:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
It is a complete waste of time. Someone should tell Microstakes he has wasted 15 years of his life posting the same crap over and over again. Doubt he cares much. As a low life, affiliate shill, he has virtually nothing to contribute to society anyway, so he may as well whittle away his pathetic existence on here. Same as the rest of the shills really.
Aw, someone is having a hissy fit? Problem is, that does not cure you from being totally boring. Just makes you boring while having a hissy fit.

Do I repeat myself at times? Of course! That is simply a byproduct of allowing the riggies to set the agenda with their whining, and most riggies (such as you) are repetitions of riggies before you. You just happen to be a very boring variant of a dull sub-section of the riggie culture.

Your whole RnG deal is random but then the sites change the cards on or after the flop thing has been tossed out many times before you (and even discussed and debunked with the math guys in detail in this very thread many years ago - feel free to read the early thread and see for yourself). You bringing a boring 2020 variant, with no creativity or originality is your limitation, so indeed the schticks I used on you were used on riggies just like you before you who followed the riggie commandments as fervently as you have to date.

Here is a much better example of a riggie who did your routine. Maybe learn from him when you come back in future (ideally with another new posting account).

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...tally-1706112/

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...41/?highlight=


Quote:
Originally Posted by slowtroll
the problem is exactly that you assume things based on your perspective. why is it a problem? because every assumption acts as a filter on the general case. so when you make a general claim with implicit assumptions you actually dont make a general claim but a more specific one that can only be stated to be true in the subset where your assumptions are satisfied. if you reformulate your claim with your assumptions being explicit, you will realise how little you actually claim, and how an opposite claim could escape your thought to be general claim.

Quite the word salad that said pretty much nothing. Perfect for the riggie thread, well done!!

ANyways, if my "perspective" is in question, then go to the forums with experts in that area and ask them for their much more expert perspective. I suggest that to riggies all the time when they toss out their silly beliefs about math concepts or programming, but none ever do it.

You would agree that doing that, and asking experts about their concerns, would make sense, right? Have a medical concern - ask an appropriate medical expert. Have a computer programming concern - as an expert at computer programming. Math concern - ask a math expert.

Why will riggies never do that as an inherent part of their culture?

Quote:
Originally Posted by slowtroll
lets step back a bit: when you claim "A", and i point out that that claim is not well defined (or context dependent), it doesnt mean i believe "A" is false. it means the claim "A" cannot be determined to be either true or false. it is very important to understand this even if you are just here to fool around.
Instead of "stepping back" in a riggie thread, go to the proper forum, the math forum, and post your concerns there. Here is a link for a forum that would help, but you will never use:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/25/probability/



Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
I hate repeating myself
You certainly do not, but that is part of the charm of this thread!


Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
but anyway: I have used trackers; I explained how HM operates; it can only display whatever hand history the site provides, and if the site provides anonymous hand history, that is all you can get in processable form.
Come on. Anon hands are a relatively new thing. You have been around since 2005. You should have literally tens of millions of hands in your databases, more if you did any significant data mining that was possible for many years.




Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
Again, that is what you want me to believe, but I tend to be a non-believer. What if they immediately pocket my ~1K contribution to the pot?
How do they do this? They rake it for $1,000?

I mean if you are going to delve into the house super user stuff - meh, whatever. Kind of fringy even for riggies, and again would be discovered very quickly by players (not like these house super users will win slowly at 5 BB/100 playing a tight aggro game ).

How are they immediately pocketing your 1K?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
I am sure they would not have much problem with my next deposit transaction fees, nor with the next one, etc.
They definitely would not if you spewed it on slots like that end of world slots riggie. Then they get all your money! That is why rooms tried hard to get people in your category to use the gambling platforms that helped them a lot more. They lose a lot when you spew your 1K deposit to a reg quickly. They win a lot if you spew it on roulette!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
That would be pretty much the only transaction fee they will be concerned with. I know how you like the idea of rake; an honest site would be only interested in the rake, optimize the rake; why would they rig stuff if they collect sooo much rake etc. But we are talking about a rigged site, theoretically, and highly improbable as it is, according to you and some others.
You need to go into more detail with how the sites are getting more rake from you than the $3 or $5 max per hand (of which you only contributed half anyway at most). Again, are you suggesting the site is filled with mysterious house super users or something that have never been detected. What is the missing piece here in your belief that $3 rake on a hand is not actually $3?




Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
Suspecting something fishy is a healthy approach;
Definitely is, but unfortunately riggies always detect fishy stuff where it pretty much does not exist and would flood discussions on real fishy issues with their weird paranoia. Lock Poker paid no players a cashout for over a year and riggies would flood that thread with complaints about new player boom switches.



Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
Just for the record, I was not losing in 2005. It all started in 2006, after the US players left PP.
Fair enough. I adjust my earlier statement to - you were not beating the games in 2006, you aint gonna beat them in 2020. Thanks for pointing that out!


Quote:
Originally Posted by dacy
What if I am interested in the subject of rigging and I have plenty material supporting it? This looks like the right place to be, no?
Well, if you have fun posting here then continue to do so! That is what this thread is about - and people on all sides should have fun, in contrast to Mr Moody Pants I replied to at the start of this post.

As for your information - well, you have yet to provide any for 15 years, so I will go with the safe side in assuming you will also provide no verifiable information for the next 15 years as well .

All the best.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 07:57 AM
The guy who has been posting the same tripe for 15 years calls others boring, with such a complete lack of self awareness it's actually hilarious

Keep the essays coming Microstakes. I'm sure they help convince 0.000001% of the people who read them. Or maybe not. That's your contribution to society. Give yourself a pat on the back.

Incidentally, there's nothing wrong with being an affiliate shillie as long as you recognize that's what you are and all you'll ever be. A bottom feeder.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:03 AM
I openly say I get paid to post here as a shill, while people like you do not! I agree there is nothing wrong with it, as unlike riggies - I like money and figure out ways to make it. See, we agree that I monetize things people like you cannot.

Again, too bad for you that you are having that end game emo thing going, but that is a typical behavior pattern for your sub-category of riggie. I gave you links to a much better version of you to read and learn from. I know you are generally afraid to read or post outside this forum, but if it makes you feel better his stuff was moved to the math form from here, so you can still have the safety of this thread when you visit the math forum, and you may even be surprised at some of the other threads when visiting there as well now!

Remember - when you come back in the future with your 3rd+ user name - be less boring!

All the best.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:09 AM
Thanks for the advice Microstakes but like the rest of your advice, it's not worth the virtual paper it's written on.

Have a nice day shilling.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy
Quite the word salad that said pretty much nothing. Perfect for the riggie thread, well done!!

ANyways, if my "perspective" is in question, then go to the forums with experts in that area and ask them for their much more expert perspective. I suggest that to riggies all the time when they toss out their silly beliefs about math concepts or programming, but none ever do it.
your "perspective" as in "your words" are not in question at all! but your perspective must be stated explicitly if you want to make claims as long as you consider them facts not just your opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy
You would agree that doing that, and asking experts about their concerns, would make sense, right? Have a medical concern - ask an appropriate medical expert. Have a computer programming concern - as an expert at computer programming. Math concern - ask a math expert.
my "concern" is that you seem to be incapable of formulating factual claims correctly even if pointed out. i dont think medical assistence is required for this (actually i would find it harsh at least), as i dont think this is out of ordinary, in the informal world happens more often than not. and in these kind of questions i am very well able to help you anyway.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
Thanks for the advice Microstakes but like the rest of your advice, it's not worth the virtual paper it's written on.

Have a nice day shilling.
Go get yourself a nice glass of milk and a cookie and you will feel better.

See, I am all about helping riggies of all kinds.

Now, make room for the better riggies and when you come back in the future (and you will) - do it with a new user name, and although you will be discovered (like you were this time) - try real, real hard to be less boring and that might hide this run of yours a bit longer. Same advice I have given to other riggies, because this thread is all about riggie repetition .


Quote:
Originally Posted by slowtroll
your "perspective" as in "your words" are not in question at all! but your perspective must be stated explicitly if you want to make claims as long as you consider them facts not just your opinion.my "concern" is that you seem to be incapable of formulating factual claims correctly even if pointed out. i dont think medical assistence is required for this (actually i would find it harsh at least), as i dont think this is out of ordinary, in the informal world happens more often than not. and in these kind of questions i am very well able to help you anyway.
Well, here is a good thing for you to then go through

1) Identify your specific concern
2) Go to the appropriate forum to address that concern
3) Link that here so we can be entertained

Note, riggies of the current era never get to (2), and most refuse to even do (1), so let's see how far you get on that list!

My overall concept of this thread is simple

1) This thread is about having fun
2) Riggies like to whine
3) Riggies never provide verifiable data
4) Riggies rarely even provide a specific theory that can be tested
5) Riggies refuse to ask for help in appropriate places to address their concerns
6) Riggies need to be properly contained so they do not get in the way of real issues, so in a way - (4) above is kind of a good thing, but I still like mentioning it because it annoys riggies

and I doubt anyone would suggest I do not follow my guidelines. The cranky Boredom riggie suggests that is all I ever do (and get paid for it)!

Let's see how you do when I ask you to post your equivalent guidelines and address my earlier list as to why you will not go to the right places to get the answers you need.

All the best.

Last edited by Monteroy; 06-08-2020 at 08:29 AM.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy
I openly say I get paid to post here as a shill, while people like you do not!
lol i didnt see that coming... is that true?
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:35 AM
Absolutely! Riggies for years would use "you make money" as an insult, and much like how most riggie theories would cost the sites money, their insults seems to suggest that people like me make money doing things like posting here, whereas they get paid zero. Riggie beliefs tend to make no sense in that regard, but that is part of the charm of their culture.

I saw no reason to dispute their riggie logic, so I openly cater to that belief of theirs and proudly agree that I get paid to post while they get paid nothing. Just shows how hard I work to meet riggie needs at times.

Thus, I got paid to post this reply.

All the best.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowtroll
lol i didnt see that coming... is that true?
They must be paying him by the word
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 08:52 AM
Absolutely! I get paid to post. You do not.

Now, go get your milk and cookie to feel better, and then wait a while and come back with a new name and try your stuff again in a more fun and entertaining manner, by learning from this exceedingly dull experience. Even you can do better!

You may also want to check out the math forums to see some new threads there in the past couple of days as some do directly discuss some of your concerns.

All the best.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 09:10 AM
The tables have turned Microstakes, you just can't see it. Every additional post serves to confirm your pathetic existence. We're laughing at you now.

Have a nice day shilling.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monteroy
... Instead of "stepping back" in a riggie thread, go to the proper forum, the math forum, and post your concerns there. Here is a link for a forum that would help, but you will never use:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/25/probability/ ...
Thanks for the reminder!

As TJ is afraid to ask questions in the Prob forum, I moved one of his earliest threads there to try to get a proper answer for him.

Hopefully, responses will help him to see where he goes wrong.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 09:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
The tables have turned Microstakes, you just can't see it. Every additional post serves to confirm your pathetic existence. We're laughing at you now.

Have a nice day shilling.
Sheesh, even your stomp your feet and take your ball home posts suck compared to the equivalent posts of past riggies of your genre. Maybe try two cookies.

Also, some math guys are helping explain your math concerns, so feel free to engage those spoooooooooooky math people if you dare... Who knows, perhaps they will give you the hug you need for comfort. Probably not. You can ask them the odds of it.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...p-fun-1722922/

All the best.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 09:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
We're laughing at you now.
All THREE of you? He sure will be devastated.

Juicetard, I love your reasoning in the WCOOP thread. Just shows how much of a fish you are. If you haven't already, you should quit poker asap.

Last edited by UsernameTaken; 06-08-2020 at 09:45 AM.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Haven
......

Hopefully, responses will help him to see where he goes wrong.
That would be when he attempts to think.

Imagine him struggling to put the round peg into the square hole and not understanding it all, then....declares it a faulty toy because you cannot prove the designer did not intend that specific opening to be round.

The narcissist can never understand or accept basic logic. They also are never capable of detailing out any solution or lucid thought patterns.

The funniest thing is how he emulates monteroy without being amusing. His attempt at some shill list was particularly stupid, including his ability to not comprehend what a shill is by definition.

Wonder if he PM'd Mason and ask to see proof of the forum existing and nobody able to post as another member.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 11:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Haven

Hopefully, responses will help him to see where he goes wrong.
Flat earthers have done experiments to prove the earth is flat. When the results aren't what they expect and actually show that the earth is round, the flat earthers claim that something is wrong with the process and the results are incorrect. I have a feeling that this would be the case here.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 11:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Haven
Thanks for the reminder!

As TJ is afraid to ask questions in the Prob forum, I moved one of his earliest threads there to try to get a proper answer for him.

Hopefully, responses will help him to see where he goes wrong.
While you're at it, create a thread for yourself asking whether it's possible to win at >5bb/100
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
While you're at it, create a thread for yourself asking whether it's possible to win at >5bb/100
Well, not for you, since a functioning brain is required. You whining like a little ***** about top set making quads does not count as having a functional brain.

Sorry, you're a dumb moron, best thing for you is to quit poker and never look back.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 11:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
While you're at it, create a thread for yourself asking whether it's possible to win at >5bb/100
Because I am feeling nice - I will do that for you, but do not worry, I will give you full credit for your belief, as I never want to take credit for special ideas that your culture creates.

All the best.


Edit to add:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2.../#post56208000

There you go, posted it for you just as you were requesting it be done! I also got paid to do t as a bonus.

Last edited by Monteroy; 06-08-2020 at 11:56 AM.
The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 11:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
Well done Clouseau. You were able to click on a user and find previous posts.

That post is an example of asking a math question and getting a bunch of people throwing accusations. There was a time when people were happy to try and break down such questions in a mathematical manner.

It's a simple question, how often would you expect to be eliminated from two consecutive tournaments to quads? You can use live or online in the answer, it doesn't matter. From that thread, it's still an open question, as you can see. Feel free to have a go and let us know how you get on.
Well, well. Look what happens when you post your questions in the right place, as MH kindly did for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by heehaww
Cliffs: no.

It can only happen if you finish <1st, so start with the chance of that: (n-1)/n where n is the # of players.

Next, given that you'll be eliminated, we only need to focus on your final hand of the tournament.

We need P(lose to quads | lose hand), but since the chance of beating quads is ~0, that's basically the same as
P(villain makes quads), which is a weighted average:

P(HU vs pocket pair)*P(V quads | pp) + P(HU vs non-pair)*P(V quads | np) +
P(3way vs pp+pp)*P(quads | 2pp) + P(3way vs pp+np)*P(quads | pp+np) + P(3way vs np+np)*P(quads | 2np) +
...
I suppose it's rare for your final hand to be against 3+ non-folding players, so you can probably stop there for an accurate estimate. As for the chance of your matchup being HU as opposed to 3way, I don't know, that's the hardest variable to determine and I'm not a donkament player. What are the stacks typically like when you're eliminated? Antes or no? (In other words, what might the ranges look like?) How many players per table?

That formula assumes you'll be all-in preflop; I'm not sure how much the estimate would change from factoring in the possibility of being eliminated in a hand containing postflop action. I'm not even sure which direction the change would be in.

Continuing, we'd take all that and multiply by (n-1)/n. If one cares enough to do all that work, that's the chance of it happening in any given tourney; call it p. The chance of it happening in back-to-back tourneys is p², but not if you play more than 2 tourneys in your lifetime. The chance of a streak of at least 2 happening within a sample of N tourneys is approximately:

(N-1)p² - (N-2)p³

That should be accurate since p will be small. If N is large enough to hurt its accuracy, you can use the following:

Code:
function streakof2(n::Int64, p::Float64)
    w = p^2
    q = sqrt((3p+1)*(1-p))
    return 1+((w-2p-1)q/(3p+1)+(w-1))/2 * ((q-p+1)/2)^(n-2)
end
That's in Julia. The formula originates from a recursive one.
The great &quot;Poker is rigged&quot; debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 12:04 PM
He is not actually interested in having his bubble popped. Narcissistic people just keep deflecting and changing conditions.

He would claim the variable is not right because he meant two callers preflop, and then the first to act bet 1.5 BBs and the second player raise exactly 3.4 BBs for 39.125% of his stack.

It is why I'd never waste time giving him the links he is too lazy to type in himself. I would then have to direct to the page, explain the big words, connect them to the statutes or rules, etc... It would never ever end. He drives his own clown car. Best to just laugh at him and his attempts to sound cool or edgy. Harmless fun amd we get to chuckle everytime he avoids following through, including his vapid response to this post.

It's cool to embrace their dumb.
The great &quot;Poker is rigged&quot; debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 01:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
You're just wrong on that. There are players in my DB, who make way more than 5bb/100 over 350K hands ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Haven
I don't believe this. Post one single screenshot from your database showing any one of your opponents making more than 5bb/100 over 350k hands. (You can black out half of his SN if you wish.) ... I assume you will make up some feeble excuse not to post a SS ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
How much would you be willing to bet on it? ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Haven
35c.

I don't believe you. Post one single screenshot from your database showing any one of your opponents making more than 5bb/100 over 350k hands. (You can black out half of his SN if you wish.)

I assume you will now make up some other feeble excuse not to post a SS?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoryJuicer
While you're at it, create a thread for yourself asking whether it's possible to win at >5bb/100
I have no doubt that some players win at 5bb/100. However, I do doubt that you have a database, let alone one with any player against whom you have played 350k hands, whether or not they won at that rate.

Prove me wrong, or make up another feeble excuse not to post a SS.
The great &quot;Poker is rigged&quot; debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 01:51 PM
This week the rig level it's highest I've experienced since the Covid-19 pandemic started. It makes sense since they already advertised their software and now they are cashing out on those who got in their system.

Skynet is operating again at full capacity. You've been warned. I'll upload some hands if youtube finish processing the vids I added.
The great &quot;Poker is rigged&quot; debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 01:55 PM
I found this thread much useful. It just takes some digging and skipping a lot of posts by the same individuals to get to the useful information.

My update for the week, PartyPoker has the rig level to its highest since the pandemic started. You've been warned.
The great &quot;Poker is rigged&quot; debate - Collected threads edition Quote
06-08-2020 , 02:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyna85
I'll upload some hands if youtube finish processing the vids I added.
sounds much fun!
The great &quot;Poker is rigged&quot; debate - Collected threads edition Quote

      
m