What do people think about TV poker being rigged? Some of the hands we have seen over the years, makes you wonder if the producers stack the deck for entertainment value.

I know what you mean, I watch that "Most extreme" reality show sometimes, and I think their producers rig the situations for people as well. Like the produces are driving through China and see a man cleaning windows on a 24 story building, and they think, let's set the building on fire, remove all the fire escapes, and film the futile rescue attempts....Entertainment Value....Sick people out there....

The really sad thing is: With tk1133 you can't be sure he isn't serious.

This reminds me of... poker! It seems rigtards forget that poker is already a game designed by casinos to give the house profit. It's already designed so that there sometimes will be big hands clashing together, it's already designed so that the underdog will suck out fairly often (often enough to encourage them to continue to chase draws etc), it's already designed so that players will bust out of a tourney etc.

Not rigged. Just highly edited so that they don't show any hands with no action on TV. And/or structured so the blinds are so high that marginal hands have to be played.

definitely rigged. sometimes it's like you can call out the exact card to come

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIT6N...eature=related

seriously though: yeah, because in reality, things that are unlikely to happen would never happen in a real game wouldnt they?

as I said above, randomness of poker in itself is sufficient to create all sorts of hands.

That's poker folks! Who are we kidding? Everyone hates the guy who can't play worth a sht, but happens to luckbox you in a big pot or knocks you out with K2os UTG.

Darvin Moon thought ESPN might be cheating him, or at least that's his excuse for telling his wife his KQ was QQ.

Or much more likely, considering he was miked-up with all kinds of people having access to the audio - including the folks at the Bluff magazine live commentary - that he was just exercising somewhat justifiable paranoia, since whatever he said could be relayed to other players at the table.

The meme that Darvin accused ESPN of cheating him has been way overblown, IMO.

I've spent a bit of time digging through this thread -- and I'm not convinced that poker is rigged. On the other hand, I am not going to blow off the idea that games might be fixed:

1.) Human nature is essentially selfish. People are motivated by greed and fear to maximize comforts and minimize pain, If juicing a poker site is hard to detect and profitable, why wouldn't someone do it?
2.) Poker and cheating are a long tradition. Poker was known as the cheating game in the 19th Century. Yardley remarked that off all the games in town, his was the only one that wasn't fixed.
3.) Juiced games are not easy to find. if the tweaks are subtle enough, they can be written off as variance. How many people their losses to the AP superusers was variance?

So don't beat up the rigtards so hard, okay?

You started out ok, then this. I don't think variance means what you think it means. Actually I'm totally sure it doesn't.

I have noticed the same thing but over a much longer period of time. I have been questioning online poker for a while now and have actually started playing alot more live poker and my results are returning to where they were when the game was still sane.

I work in industry so I am privy to the software functionaltity of online sites and I cannot believe it is rigged or giving miracle cards to certain players even though it seems that way. It definately does not benefit any poker site to favour certain players.

My theory is rather simple but it is the only one that makes sense to me.
I believe the reason for the increase in the suck outs and bad beats is due to the influx of amateur players and gamblers. I think in past years you got to the river alot less than you do now because now certain players refuse to fold if they have hit 2nd pair or even bottom pair and therefore just on that point alone (not being able to get players to fold) you will experience more suck outs and bad beats.

You see the river more times 2003-2006..the problem is noone have the complete shuffling to analyse the games. You need all shuffled cards including whole cards and mucked hands.

They never rigg a deck that you can simple find ..i am sure that XX wins close to the expected time. Its more interesting to see all wholecards and the flop...but i dont have a tool to do this. If the site is rigged i am sure you find the secret in the dealt wholecards and the flop.

You have convinced yourself it is rigged without the holecard info and yet say that is where the secret is. So how did you unearth the secret without it?

frogythe knows how they DO it .Poker sites Program

That thread is the funniest stuff I've seen lately. I had to get up out of my chair almost crying.

Especially this:

You don't need to see every card to see if it's rigged slightly, so that hands that should win 80% of the time only win 78 or 79%. That would show up in any large sample knowing just one person's hole cards.

What you'd need to figure out is what benefit the site gains from having favorite hands win slightly less often than normal, how they could sneakily do this, and whether they'd make a profit from letting bad hands win slightly more often while keeping track of who's "due" to win with a worse hand/lose with a better one etc.

"Variance" is just a of talking about luck.

What site do you think would be rigged

Poll Coming

first

/thread

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

the blue pill

i care to dissent. red

Cereusly?

Terrible poll.