I'm not looking for a debate. I'm asking you about what I saw. I have no reason to lie nor would I. This isn't a personal attack against you and I never said you condoned these actions. Perhaps you removed them b/c you didn't know it was going on....this wasn't an attack on your integrity...


What site are you talking about, where was this rigtard was posting?

People try to post about illegal activities on 2+2 all the time, doesn't mean the site's creator is "corrupt..."

Can you clarify here Indiana? Are there bots that can see other players' hole cards during a hand, superuser-style?

I thought about proposing a bet on when you'd be back, but my last idea didn't go over well at all.

He's got about an hour to respond... ...I'm giving him a real oppertunity here....

So, anybody wants to take my bet on the previous page?

I read Spadebidders work also. Very impressive.
However it doesn't proof anything.

Here is an idea. How about analyzing the distribution of hands per individual player?
If poker is rigged winning players would tend to get worse hands than average and/or bad players would suck out more than average.
If that is not the case that should end this "debate" once and forever.

Uh, this debate never ends. An unrigged site today can become a rigged site tomorrow. We need tools to detect this!

This warms my heart.

Spade does a freak study on every possible flop combination, including one riggies never consider for their theories, and all of that will mean nothing to them until a study is done to show that they are not specifically a target of some massive coverup.


Go for it spade, test if bad players suck out a lot please.

Actually, bad players will suck out a lot more as they will get themselves into really bad spots a lot more where sucking out is the only way to win. That's why if you search them you will find that these suck out machines tend to be deep losing players long term. Not that any of this logic will matter to a riggie.

Damn, I do like the term riggies a lot more, I am a convert.


spade - detailed studies of massive hands of every possible combination

riggies - me must be good , why me lose, bad players suck out on me. It rigged. Me good.

Sure technically the "debate" continues, but really - not so much.

So you will surely take my bet, right Monteroy?

Do you have a statistical background and understand Spadebidders work?

Huh? I think Monteroy would agree that the people who claim it is rigged are usually poor players.

I agree with your bet premise and wouldn't bet against you.

The hole card distribution to an individual player is known to every player who saves their hands. So far no one has ever shown a record of a statistically abnormal one (where deviations and outliers are not in the normal proportion range for sample size). So tests of targeted-player theories that involve hole card manipulation will continue to be monitored by millions of individual players.

However, there really is only one way that hole cards could even be fiddled for a targeted player group and I've described it before. It wouldn't be done by messing with the randomness of the deck/shuffle, as that would be readily apparent by checking the community cards (what is left over). The only way would be to deal all hole cards randomly, but before sending them out to individual player computers, decide who gets the best or worst starting hand based on some targeting criteria. Then send out the randomly dealt hole cards with the targeted player getting the desired hand and his original hand going to the slot where that one was taken from (which is random). Then deal the rest of the hand, including all community cards, normally. This method doesn't modify the shuffle or deal at all. But it is still readily detectable by individual players, and wouldn't work for long on a large scale.

As for suckouts, the community cards are either random or they are not. I've looked at flops and I'm working on late streets now. Schemes to somehow "keep up with" any fiddled turns or rivers and then even them out later would very quickly become unwieldy and impossible to maintain a true distribution of community cards. Simulations can show that this would quickly become chaotic, because there are far too many combinations to track. The evening-out would also have to eventually result in a fair distribution to all players over the long term, and would at best be short term shifts in results that would get cancelled out. DUCY? These are the "timing" theories, and they fall apart under scrutiny.

The luck portion of poker is more than sufficient to keep losers/fish in the game as long as possible, and you just don't see anyone winning 100ptbb/100 over time. An average that good is very rare. Skill edges in poker are not massively overwhelming like they are in games that don't have a chance element. So sites don't have to monkey with something that already works to their advantage, i.e. lady luck.

PS - thanks to those who have commented on my work (including Monty below). There's more to come. Feel free to leave comments or questions directly on my web site.

After the guy screaming to bet 25,000 when he played 1/2 cent games and this emotional trainwreck riggie with his degen bets, I think I am done with trying to get prop bets to the point of happening...

Though am I getting 2-1 odds on something again...

Do I understand all of the math that went into spade's work. Duh, no, but I understand his summaries and his data when looking at it, and my common sense theory is he did not spend hundreds of hours manufacturing fake data to try to trick meaningless riggies.

What he did is a very impressive piece of work.

I bet Monteroy won't bet.

I bet he would... He is sincere w/ his posts....

I'll zip and send you my tournaments for the past few months (though it is a mix of NL and Omaha SNGs, DONs and MTTs) if you want to do a study on them. That way I can be told I am in on it as well or something if it proves nothing wrong.


On a much, much, much less significant topic

You forgot a little element

Try this


I bet Monteroy won't bet against random unknowns without standard escrow conditions.

Which - yes, totally true.


Not going to bother wasting time any more, other than to say any time you or anyone wants to do any coin flip bet of any kind giving me 2-1, I am game with required escrow conditions.

So far you guys are a whopping 0-2 once those mundane conditions are requested. People see through that scam. Be more creative in future. To your credit, most degen scammers just vanish when they cover is blown, you keep trying to pretend you were willing to do your bet in a fair, transparent manner. Only fooling yourself there maam.

All the best.

...and very careful with his money. Not taking any chances; gonna layoff those $50 bets.

dude, Monty would have to be on crack to make a bet with you without escrow, for whatever $$. Can we drop this now?

Considering he offered up very reasonable conditions that you refused to meet, making you look the fool, you'd really be best served by dropping this.

I like how you guys chime in together, like Pillars of Defense for Online Poker.

This thread has taught me that the bet I proposed was not a good idea at all. Obviously, a prop that earns nothing but abuse was not a well designed bet. I apologize to all who were offended by the whole thing.

If anybody wants to pursue it further, feel free to send a PM, and the thread can go back to discussions of riggodology.

This question is incoherrent, or I'm not sure what's your definition of a "bot", maybe you just use it as a synonim of something "evil".

There is no magic in seeing hole cards: This is possible generally in one of these ways:
1) a bug in the casino software (very big bug - just proffesional opinion - I believe no casino is that stupid nowadays. Due to that noone waste time to look for such bugs nowadays).
2) intentionally left option in the casino software (like UB/AB) that was exploited - never heard of such case (except of UB case, where it is internal misuse), thou I'm not interested in that.
3) or a hacker plants trojan on other user's PC
4) there are other theoretical cases (e.g. someone like your ISP sniffing&spoofing your network traffic) but I don't believe that happens.

The 3rd thing above is what is real and exists out there in the net - if you download random programs and run them on your PC it might happen to you (and of course building such stuff - trojans - is illegal).

qft.

on #4, they also have to deal with decrypting the data somehow, but the net cost of doing that is likely to be greater than the value of the data you can extract.

This edge case was shown to be possible with that flash poker site (now closed) that wasn't using real encryption. Modern SSL/TLS encryption may be breakable in theory, but not really. As you mention, the computing power (cost) would be enormous. Like NSA grade.

The real answer to the original question is simple. Hole card data for other players is never even sent to your computer, unless there is a showdown and all betting is done. So seeing (sniffing, hooking,whatever) other hole cards from the poker client running on your computer isn't possible.

Edit - as to the confusion about what "hooking" means in computer programming, it means one program injects itself into the running code of another program to interact with it. Lots of programs work this way, it's pretty standard (and innocuous) stuff. How do you think HUDs work? They hook into the poker client.

(Non-Rigtard Bait)

TK had raised the possibility that these bots were seeing others' hole cards. Your reply wasn't clear so I asked for clarification. Answer makes sense and is along the lines that I thought.

Are there any threads on sites allowing SN changes vs not? I like the idea very much, but currently most sites are against this for various "security" reasons. I feel the opposite is the case. But I don't run a poker site. I might start a new thread if there's not already one started. I haven't had success with the search function.. haven't found anything yet.

(btw, I have e-mails from both FullTilt and PokerStars listing their "reasons")


** Nevermind.. found something!

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...hanges-664485/

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...n-name-650604/

I predict a bunch of fresh new rigged posters coming very soon, all due to Rush Poker on FTP. You play about 500 hands an hour with one table open, and that sht is bananas. Variance is brutal, and it is so addictive and fast that people are playing crazy on it. Seeing players with 8 or 10 buyins in front of them is common (yes $1000 stacks at NL100).