But there is no pendulum effect. People often say stuff like "it will even out in the long run", but that's not true. If you flip a coin 100 times and start out with 20 tails in a row, what is your expectation for the next 80 flips? Of course 40-40 (not 50-30), meaning your total expectation is now 40-60, and no longer 50-50.

Sure, the closer you come to infinity the closer to 50-50 you will come, but there is no "oh I lost x buy-ins yesterday so I can expect to run hot tomorrow/sometime next week/whenever" effect. Every hand is a new hand, and the cards have no memory.

Please verify your claim (i.e. post stats/HHs over a significant sample) and we'll all help you ban online poker.

Edit: and Snakecharmer too

Not that I think it is, but anyone else feel like Rush is rigged? Anytime I play it I get riddled with big hands before and after the flop and have lost over 90% of those big hands since I started playing rush. I know variance can be a bitch especially when playing this fast but It's a lot of bad beats to suffer so quickly and so excessivly.

So you don't think it's rigged, but it doesn't feel quite right. Doesn't that mean you think it's rigged then?

Online poker is live poker on steroids. It will inevitably seem like more bad beats etc happens. Rush poker is online poker on steroids. Consequently... yeah you can probably figure out the rest of that sentence.

And again, please your post stats. If it actually was rigged, do you really think it is rigged in such a blatant way so that people lose with big favorites 90% of the time...?

(And it's amazing how often that 90% figure pops up in this thread)

Selective memory is a powerful phenomenon.

Has anyone noticed how the short stack always hits to stay alive during MTTs?

I'm not surprised rigtards come here to complain. What's surprising is how much time shills spend here attacking rigtards.

Attacking (well some) but mainly explaining. Some do it to protect the integrity of online poker (from which they derive a significant portion of their income), others, such as myself, like the challenge of arguing with people who don't think critically (I spend most of my time in RGT, go figure!) and the development of critical thinking skills. I recognize that if you're a rigtard, you are being distressed by something that in my opinion, for the most part, is not warranted, and so I also like to help get them (like Donko) back on the right track.

Mostly, though, its fun, and a diversion from work!

Are there any shills here?

Do you have any evidence?

The GOP are the ones leading the way to make online poker extinct. But even if they weren't its still an iffy thing that the games would be more beatable if regulated in the US. Depending how much a cut they take in taxes the game could get harder and there will be even more rigged people then today.

Don't tap the glass stars.

But the server dealing them might! *dramatic music*

Rigtards = people who think online poker is rigged

Shills = a convenient term for those who mock rigtards

Instead of shills, maybe the term flargs would be better (flaming arrogant geeks).

Why don't you ask them for your hand histories and then post them here? I'm guessing you won't though. Prove me wrong.

Two Moos, why don't you respond to the substance of what these flargs are telling you? Have you taken any time to evaluate the arguments they are making and seeing if they can actually help you? Do you think they are FOS? If so, then why?

If you really want to see if there is a problem here, why not attack it from a logical, not emotional, perspective. You might find it helps your game as well.

Dismiss this as arrogant if you want to, but its some food for thought.

Yogi Berra has an account here????

Or if you are wealthy donk on Pokerstars

Tap what glass lol. Im more than likely a much more successfull player than you lol.

?

You can also get hands from Poker Table Ratings. I noticed you have 12,072 hands of .5/1 FLH that you could get from there. You may have to pay for these, but it would be a small investment if you actually feel like you are being cheated.

From what I can tell you are a very loose player at this limit/game (34.7% looser than the general population) and your winrate is pretty average. You also go to showdown a lot (you go to showdown more frequently than 72.3% of the population). It may be a good idea to analyze your game before jumping to the rigged conclusions.

From the Beginners Forum, we learn "there have been major problems and scandals in the past." Also, "evidence suggests upper management and/or ownership may have been involved."

In a sense, the debate is over. Sometimes, online poker is rigged. The threat is not presented by rigtards but by the online sites and their policies.

For example, why are players permitted to use programs like PokerTracker and Hold'em Manager? I suspect many unwary players (and rigtards) feel these programs create a rigged environment though the deal may be completely fair.

Everyone is someones fish. Stars telling people to come learn strat on 2p2 is taping the glass. It was a joke anyway though...

Thats all cool but Im a tournament player lol

And the stats you are reffering to have a 2.63 bb/100 winrate lol so I think Im playing right =) and that was running horrible. Whats your winrate hehe?

Ok, fair point: in the past, cheating by the site has been found. I think we can add in the Pitbull case here where while cheating was never proven explicitly, the fact that the site was willing to shut down rather than provide access to massive amounts of handhistories strongly suggests that they knew that the HHs would show something.

Ok, so what is the lesson from these two cases?

1) there are cheaters out there
2) sometimes those cheaters are from the inside
3) we should be vigilant.

I don't think you're going to find any opposition to those points. The arguments that go on in this thread is "how do we go about doing #3."

Because the other main lesson from those two scandals is how they got caught. In each case undoubtedly suspicion began to form as a nagging feeling. This is where most rigtards stop. What these guys did next was what got results: they painstakingly went over their handhistories, and shared information, building a case. They didn't just whine about it, they put together convincing evidence.

The shills, as you call them (some of whom were directly involved in uncovering those two scandals) have provided tons of useful information to help out people who suspect there is. Almost universally, their thanks is to be called shills and their advice ignored, which results into them resorting to insults and clever one liners. But there is so much good stuff there, and I'm sure I've advised you to look at this in the past.

This is a separate question but the market has taken care of this. There are sites, such as Cake (unless they've changed) which don't allow these programs.

Anyhow, hopefully you will see my point. You can decide whether you really want to see if something is going wrong or whether you are comfortable with your suspicions alone and feel good just shouting about how unfair every bad beat is.

Well you play similar(very aggressive, see a lot of showdowns) it seems across all cash games (winrate 0.38bb/100). My main point is that you should maybe analyze your game as well. Most people who think it is rigged don't like to hear that though.

Also, why don't you ask for your hand histories and post them here?

I do see your point and agree with your post. Suits me to bury the shouting and namecalling, though rigtard doesn't offend me.

My limited experience playing Rush is sucking out a fair amount, and also getting sucked out on pretty hard.

You know, like everything else, but faster.