more of who she is and what happened to her and less zomg paper bag time.

the cake is rigged

It's not the fact that it's over 15000-1 that makes this so freakishly unlikely, it's the sheer number of hands you would have to see on average for it to happen.

My own flawed calculation came up with about 3.5 million hands, but somebody else came up with figure in the billions. Even though 15000-1 is not that great of a longshot, it's the length of time it would take on average for that sequence of events to play out, which is longer than the majority of people will ever play in their entire life.

Of course, as I mentioned before it could happen to somebody in a short number of hands early on in their playing time, in which case that person could rightly claim to be extremely unlucky.

yes these sites are rigged. If you don't believe it open up several accounts and watch 1 take off avoiding many badbeats while others lose or breakeven.

wow, in a thread full of idiocy this still manages to stand out. that's pretty much how variance works.
you don't have to see all those hands yourself - they're being dealt all the time at other tables. If it's a 15000-1 shot it means that 1 hand out of 15000 will have that anomaly. That doesn't mean it has to be 1 out or your 15000, as long as it's statistically in line with that figure over a large enough sample size, ie if it happens 3x over 30000 hands that's not too odd - it should even out over the long run. So until the theorists can show data proving otherwise that's all they are - theories.
I have had unlucky things happen, but I understand that's all it is: luck. For better or for worse, these things happen. Again, I don't think the poker sites have any idea who I am, much less a reason to cheat me out of my monies. If they're trying to, they're doing a poor job of it.

The problem is you are factoring in the chance of getting aces and losing with them before you even get dealt cards and having it happening the 6 exact hands in a row one after the other

well i can admit i prolly did a bad job at laying out the numbers and mabye did them wrong or explained it a horrid way but this sequence of "unlucky" hands happened to me when i was a losing player but like a roulette wheel once you lose that last hand with aces it doesn't mean you are going to win the next time you get aces
ever heard of the ego and defense mechanisms? mabye you are so concered with all the bad beats you are running into that you don't notice all the mistakes you are making sure it might be bad luck but NO ONE (but phil hellmuth obv) plays perfectly all the time so during this bad streak you could atleast improve your play is it really just bad cards or bad play also? see how you might have been able to get away from these hands were you all in pre-flop with aces everytime or did they push all in AFTER they hit the set and had you beat? if they got it all in once they already hit the set and you were behind is it really that bad of a beat? like i said aces have the ability to make palyers play worse pocket aces does not mean you
insta-win i cannot tell you how many times i have busted a fish that pushs with aces or kings when i hit my set of 3's
also how many hands have you played?
lets just say you forget about this whole incident wipe the slate clean and go play 50k more hands and come back to me in a 3-4 weeks and tell me how it went did you consitently lose or win? 50k is a better sample size you can do it on a differant account or a differant poker site or you could even make 3 differant accounts at 3 differant sites and play 50k hands on each are you still consitently loseing or winning?

You're confusing the probabilities again. The chance that, having shown down AA vs. 99 or something six consecutive times, that AA will have lost each time is 1 in 15625. But, in order to even see AA against a lower pair, the odds against are 1 in 5500. So, in order to see AA vs. lower pair six times, you'd have to statistically play around 33,000 hands. In order, statistically, to see it happen six consecutive times, you'd need about half-a-billion hand.

Note, also, that if 15,625 people have each played 33,000 hands, there's a very reasonable chance that one of them has had AA cracked six times by a lower pair. Odds are, also, that he's complaining on 2+2.

its so funny that the majority of 2p2ers act like its impossible that the sites rig their RNGs. anyone who thinks every single site has a legit RNG is a complete moron.

Why not, for all the rigged 'nuts'




http://Nuts.co.uk

Would you like to make a bet then?

I'll bet you even money that neither you nor anyone else can find a single poker site with more than 1000 currently active real-money players with an unfair / rigged RNG before the end of this year.

played cake for 11 months, they started rigging their RNG about 2-3 months ago. i am 100% certain. played over 2000 sngs/mtts during those 3 months. played over 10,000 sng/mtts total on cake. been playing online poker for 5 years now. the small sites do whatever is necessary to make money. there will be a big scandal in the next year from a whistleblower that proves that the RNGs are rigged on many of the sites.

remember all the idiots on 2p2 that said its impossible for sites to have superusers that can see your hole cards.

better yet, why dont you or someone else prove to us that they arent rigged. hmmmmmm

dude, I'm not confusing any probabilities. my example is for any situation that is 1/15000 or 1/33000 or 1/100000. my point is the same regardless - this event will happen the with the same frequency whether you are at the table or not.
you've got this all wrong, buddy. there's a saying - "the burden of proof is on the accuser." If you're "100% sure" then please show us what convinced you, and your "feeling" doesn't count.

and the bold part is pretty gay. I'm 100% sure of that.

I can do that. How much are we going to bet?

You are right in concept, wrong in math. While Stars has dealt nearly 10 billion hands, for these probabilistic purposes they've dealt closer to 90 billion... 9 player ring games. It's also not very statistically interesting, unless you happen to have the histories on every hand they've ever dealt.

I'm only dealing in the concept. If I had every single hand history since Stars opened then I reckon these figures would be pretty darned close to the statistical norm. If I get 'em, I'll forward them to you for the math part, ok?

"they started rigging their RNG about 2-3 months ago. i am 100% certain"

Let me guess,this is when you started losing more?Also,i guess you dont know what 100% or the word certain means.When you say such idiotic things how do you expect people not to think your an idiot??To be fair,im sure most believed you were an idiot before that,but thats besides the point.


"better yet, why dont you or someone else prove to us that they arent rigged. hmmmmmm"

Once again i refer you to the part above about saying idiotic things.I cant prove youre not a monkey but that doesnt mean you might be a monkey.Wait,bad example.

Yep. That's exactly right. "They would never risk it." "Reputation is everything, they'd never do it." "Not in a million years, gosh no!"

And I'll say what I said in the other now-deleted "thread. Which is,

During the initial stages of the Absolute poker scam, people were caught off-guard, and many said, "you know, if the sites wanted to rig the games with in-house superusers, they actually could do it AND NOBODY WOULD EVER KNOW!"

Well, duh, then if so, then I guess that's probably what at least some of them have done. Why not? If nobody would ever know, and if there are people in business who are unscrupulous, then duh, they'll do it, probably.

What is the motivation for these posters? Do they just want people to agree with them, or do they genuinely feel they are doing humanity a good turn?

I strongly suspect some carnival games are rigged so I simply choose not to play them. I don't troll Ring Toss/Milk Bottle Websites trying to point that out to the rubes who are still getting taken.

I want to play a fair game, that's all.

Well, you might if there were a $10,000,000 Guaranteed World Championship of Ring Toss.

How exactly is crying 'wolf' gonna achieve that for you?

On a side note, before the muckrakers, people were at higher risk of eating tainted meat products. See "The Jungle".

And while I don't consider making comments about online poker to an internet bulletin board as anything even approaching muckraking, it's better than doing nothing.

Then find one, play it and do so quietly. If you know or suspect that one isn't don't play it. Quietly, I add again.

I don't go to Christian Discussion Forums to tell them that the bible is a book of fairy tales. I disagree with the business of religion so I just don't spend my money in churches.

See my response above (we posted at the same time).

That's a remarkable attitude. There are sites where a sufficient amount of data collected thus far demonstrates that it is probable that something fishy is going on, and your response (I presume) would be to say nothing? Is that correct?