you should ask a maths guy friend for help at this point.

you said:
all i asked you is to do exactly what you said would be easy to do.

I get it. I've had crazy good and bad runs, across all networks for many years. I've run very similar to that live, although down swings are much less violent from one tabling to see my stack slowly dissipate in front if me. I just get up and leave.

The thing is, you need an entire history to show aberrations of statistical probabilities and math. Depending on what you're looking for, it could be 200 hands of AA all in preflop losing 45% or couple million hands to show smaller unusual patterns like those needed to reveal bot ring or something.

I'm PanAm on pokerbros. We obliterate most GTDs. I've seen the 100K go over 300K. Not sure about diamond, although recent grumbling about it in another thread.

alright your original post changed a bit, so i'll give it another go:

i believe that you thought i was trying to corner you when in fact i really just expected you to disprove that you believe can be (easily) disproven. hoped to see something, anything...

rest assured i am aware of the concept you are trying to communicate here. and no, i am not expecting you to prove unprovable claims. (i dont even expect you to prove the unprovability of these kind of claims)

regarding the comprehension of vague definitions, well, unfortunately thats part of the game. but you have people skills, you are good at dealing with your customers, so i guess you make sense of these "vague stuff" more easily than, say, a maths guy in the probability forum.

of course you can back out, but it is kind of childish to ask me to do the work to back up the claim you made, just because it turned out that you have difficulties trying to do it yourself.

Again, I get what you are trying so hard to do here, as many riggies before you have tried, and it is why I was able to pretty much exactly predict your replies earlier. People like you behave in very, very routine and predictable ways, and they have all been done here before, and it is why you will never realize how easy it is to compete against you. Riggies like dacy similarly have zero idea how massively they are outclassed when they play.

No, I will not use my time to disprove every silly riggie claim, and my refusal to use a ton of my time to chase down silly riggie claims is because my time has value, whereas riggies - not so much value. As well, in the end - it is the riggie who has their whatever concerns. They do not concern me, because they are all imaginary.

So, using the pocket pairs dude. No, I am not going to do a hand history analysis of millions of hands to prove to him that pocket pairs are dealt in the proper expectation. It is his concern, so he can do that if he really wants, or he can pay others to analyze his hand histories or other hand histories to detect the rig he believes exists.

That is advice I have suggested to riggies over the years. In the pocket pair guys case - it would literally take a minute for anyone with a reasonable size database to discover what he is saying is happening, if it was happening. It would not be some hidden thing that nobody would notice. The fact that nobody has yet come out with verifiable data to support his concern (with HHs or an insider whistleblowing) is strong evidence to me that his concern is invalid, and he can invest the minimal time or money needed to prove it or disprove it as he likes. Nearly every riggie just wants to whine, they do not want to do the actual work, and often they expect others to do it for them for free, as you are suggesting with your post.

Riggies make the claims, the burden is on them to prove it, and many times I tell them exactly how they can prove it (or exploit their silly rig for money if the rig was real). Pretty simple stuff, and all the attempts for riggies to reverse that with the disprove a negative commandment is just their way of deflecting from that obvious situation, and it is why riggie stuff is a literal nothingburger outside of entertaining and whiny riggie threads.

If you want to pay me to research these riggie concerns - no problem, I will negotiate a price with you, after after I get paid I will outsource it to someone else who has expertise in it, and make a cut on finding him database analysis business, and we can do that as many times as you can afford. Obviously once it is time for a riggie to put up any money to really uncover their rig - that is when they back away and continue with the "prove me wrong" approach, so I expect more of that from you at this point, as that seems your go to routine for now.

At least take a small break and support your local riggie with some words of encouragement. So sad that you riggies avoid that type of help to your kin these days.

All the best.

I've offered it for free many times. Not a single person has accepted it.

Very, very common. Even in holdem with fewer cards dealt, it isn't all that remarkable but a bit rare. In PLO it happens every day. You are dealing out between 36 and 41 of a 52 card deck. When you leave only 9 cards undealt, what is the chance that only 2 of them are spades? Does that help your perspective? 25% of the deck is spades. 2 cards out of 9 is 22%.

There was once a riggie in here that argued hard for his literal belief that there are nonrandom patterns in the deal that are recognizable by human observation but that are not detectable by statistical analysis of hand histories (on the same hands). He actually stated it that way.

The irony is that some form of this comes out over and over and they don't see how ridiculous it is.

Good luck with that
He has you pretty well boxed in Microstakes. You claimed something would be easy to disprove and he asked you to go ahead and do it. Then you shat yourself. Not unlike Dud when he was asked to back up his claims. Which puts you two in exactly the same boat as the riggies.

Have a nice day shilling.

Nobody, ever, should prove anything to you. It's a waste of time and internet bandwidth until you back up a single dopey claim you made.

You're a basket of hot stinky air.

Heh, that guy is still trying so hard to find a riggie buddy, and he always gets the Heisman, even from other riggies. Kind of sad, but also amusing to see.

The new riggies (pocket pairs guy, he who raises first guy, 9x4=36 guy) are all more charismatic as well, and they will at least have the common sense not to linger way beyond their expiry date (even the guy who said he will never go away).

Onto the next riggies!

Your expiration date was about 15 years ago

Have a nice day shilling.

Nah, unlike you I still thrive in this industry by being competitive and constantly adapting. That is something you will never understand, nor experience, and you being butthurt just adds a tiny amount in the form of amusement. You are still utterly boring, so maybe support one of these up and coming riggies specifically. Who knows - maybe you will finally get that riggie buddy after all those failed attempts on your part. If not, then linger here for as long as you like and visit here as others before you do, long after they have been beaten by this industry as you have. Just the way it goes for riggies like you, so make the best of it!

All the best.

You sir, sound more like a cheerleader more than a help to the situation at hand. You must get paid for post to as mentioned by someone else in this thread.?? Anybody can say "ah well what about this and what about that." Since you see it so often as you quoted, post a picture. Like I said, b4, you can't and your comment was irrelevant. Besides, the pic I posted had 11 of the same suit in play and it just so happened to be with the only players that called a raise post flop. Compete induced action flop. There's no downloadable histories on pokerbros and neither on pppoker, and this is why it's being asked for. These apps must bring revenue to 2+2 cause there's nobody out there that wouldn't feel that this is at least a little suspicious except you guys. All i keep reading is where's your proof, but since all you guys saying that it can, where's your proof that you keep asking everyone else for? I posted mine, I'll wait...

You posted a hand. That is proof that 11 cards of a suit were shown. That has been proven due to your hand being posted.

Now show you entire history so we can see how far outside standard deviation the flush vs flush happens. Then that would be proof that something is askew with the deals.

He actually does not get paid to mod here, which I personally think is insane. I do get paid a ton to post here though, and I do like to get to the bottom of things while earning that large paycheck, or at least pretend to, because riggie concerns are very important.

Anyway, you said you posted your proof. There are a few new rirggies, so it is not always easy to keep track which is which, but what specific riggie belief did you definitively prove with I assume a screenshot of a single hand?

I ask this, not as a trap question, but rather as a starting point for you to build on. Once you define your specific rig thing, then on a site with no downloadable HHs the next thing for you to do is setup a time where you stream while watching (or playing with a delay) where you can then record and show your specific rig in action one hand after the next over say 100-200 hands. Given how obvious the rig is that you can see it with your own eyes - this should be plenty of hands to definitely prove it to the doubters. That way you have more than a cherry picked snap shot. You instead will have a verifiable (as others can watch as it happens) recording of your concerns playing out right before everyone's eyes.

I am sure doing this is very exciting to you, so let us know when that will happen, but keep in mind that to date - riggies have never followed through on stuff like this, so nobody expects that to be different this time, so no real pressure. Also, that juice riggie above really needs a friend, so he may go along with anything you say or do if you offer that. Never hurts to have a supporter in that regard. Hope this helped and keep us updated!

All the best.

So you think it's rigged to come out with hands like this? Wouldn't everyone get a little suspicious if they kept seeing 10 or 11 cards of the same suit on reveals, and move on to another site? It doesn't seem like a rig that any cheating site would add to it's repertoire if they wanted to stay under the radar, as it is totally obvious that it would at least be talked about, and some players who don't understand randomness might even come up with an "it's rigged" theory.

How many times have you seen the ten of a suit hands out of how many hands? (You can guess the figures if you're not certain, as no one would expect you to keep thorough records.)

Defend or Criticize:

"A legitimate specific Riggie Theory with compelling evidence would sustain its own thread, and not be relegated to this LC Thread."

A good example would be the recent Botring thread that provided compelling evidence of these bots on WPN.

How come bots can be identified with available data, but not ANY Riggie Theory?

You are a grade A idiot but at least it's amusing reading your nonsense The same can't be said for Dud unfortunately.

Have a nice day shilling.

One of those things actually exists, biggest difference.

Some riggies truly believe what they say and are even open to learning what the issue is or even of it is truly happening.

Some just throw their hands up in frustration and keep the same route while making the claim of it being obviously rigged. The interesting thing about those players...they know AA gets cracked, yet they still play AA. They know runner runner draws fill out, but don't play them. The action flop riggie knows the flops ate to get max chips in and award the weak hands, yet they will not play 5/6 off against 3 bet called twice.

Then there is the very bottom of the barrel riggie, like the floater that just won't flush no matter how many times you try. They think their smarter than everyone amd cannot see that everyone laughs at them. To understand their view, read ConspiracyTheoryJuice's post. How many things did he say he could easily show and never showed a single thing other than they suffer from cranio-fecal syndrome.

I appreciate you continuing to follow the riggie commandments, in this case

Commandment 3: Thou shalt hurl personal attacks

but I will still try minimally to get you that riggie buddy you keep trying to find. I figure if one of them latches onto you they might help average out your boredom, but all are resisting for obvious reasons.

All the best.

I disagree with you here. The site doesn't care, and why would they when it's people like on this site that still state that their deals are random. It's clearly all about action to get the money in, and that's easily noted on the pics that I took. If I can post videos here I would, but both were raised pre flop, but it just so happened that out of the 9 people at the table and out of the 6 that folded and with 3 left that called the RAISE pre, the 3 magically all have to be the ones with clubs when the flop comes with clubs. Casinos have been said to have rigged slots, but people will leave that casino and go to another one and play that same slot in that other casino.. People are going to get their fix hoping to be the lucky (chosen) one to win some money. These apps attract people by convenience. Fast withdrawals, unlike most sites that make you wait 24hrs and some make you wait a week depending on your deposit, and the ease to get your fix when you want to play poker. People here are speaking on the obvious, and I see the same defending is happening as when people addressed the bot issue on ACR, but we see how that turned out in the end here. It's all about action. Flop a set on pokerbros, and I bet it gives someone else a straight on the flop. Ex: AA77 flop 679.. JJKK flop KJA.. Like I said, all action

This doesn't increase the site's profit.

Also you obviously don't understand the game of slots.

Agreed ✅

This thread has gone on for almost 12 years now, and it has occurred to me that there is a tv show that is almost identical. I'm not sure how long it has been going, but it has been at least 15 years. For fun, some of you might want to check it out on Youtube.

The show is the Atheist Experience, and is based in Austin. It is a call-in show, and there are a number of different people who have acted as moderators, though there is one who does the bulk of the work, Monteroy, oops, no his name is Matt, but you'll see the two of them are similar.

The basic premise of the moderators is that they are not saying there is NO god, just that they have yet to see convincing evidence that there is one. People call in and try to offer their "proof" of God. As of yet, none has provided anything remotely approaching "evidence" or "proof". Some of them sound like they are certain that they have the absolute proof - somehow because they have come up with evidence or an argument that has never been thought of before in history.

Whether you believe in God or don't, or believe online poker is rigged or don't, the similarities in the arguments are striking. Matt tries to get callers to put together logical arguments, but he generally ends up just trying to explain how their arguments are based on logical fallacies. Typically the arguments have to do with "well just look around, there has to be a god"; which is analogous to "look at all the bad beats I get, it must be rigged".

For anyone who enjoys reading this thread, you might very well enjoy watching some of the videos. I don't suggest watching any of the full show episodes (I think they are 2 hours long) but instead watch the ones that have been cut down to single callers. Some are really funny and entertaining, and some are definitely educational.

I am sure that whatever show loves that you watch it, but there is a bit of a difference. Hand histories exist for most of the sites which would easily prove (if you believe in mathematics - perhaps you do not) most of the riggie concerns. Those that do not have downloadable hand histories can use current streaming technology to show their rig in action, like this latest guy who posted one hand as proof.

Kind of different from your example. I actually do not question people's faith in a higher being as I understand the human emotional need for it, and for many it provides a good structure to their lives. If you have read this thread you will see I am not one of the dismissive atheists as some other shills are in that regard ( I tend to find their views on religion to be pretty narrow). I respect faith as a concept, but in this industry there is actual real hand history data that exists, and ways of actually recording hands being played (for sites with no downloadable HHs), so that kind of removes the whole faith based thing as a foundation for most riggie concerns, unless one does not believe in actual mathematics. Many riggies do not believe in mathematics (you can see the quotes in my annual riggie list).

Now with that said - if a riggie gets more enjoyment in this industry from having faith in a rig - cool, go for it, do whatever you like if it is for fun. If they want others to believe though they have the unfortunate reality that hand histories/streaming/math would do the job quickly if any of their beliefs were real (and of course insiders talking). I always suggest riggies take the actions needed to prove their rigs, like I did with this latest bazillion of a single suit gets dealt riggie, but they never do that. Guess in the end they have no faith .

All the best.