or he could read the thread where its been discussed in detail already.

Its showing up all the time. Explain why all the good players posting graphs show ev lines above actual wins. Explain it.

Lets test it. Spadebidder dances around what are improtant statistics. Most of it is irrelevant to what Im saying. Lets run simple tests like comparing the the odds of a underpair winning against an overpair in a race. And then lets calculate all the times this happens to a player and see if those odds = the original. All these graphs spadebidder shows are smoke screens dancing around the real problem. There are leaks in everyone of his experiments. And where is evidence of where these player hand histories are even coming from.

As you call everyone who enters this thread on the opposite side of the debate a rigtard. STOP BEING A HYPOCRIT MORONS. You sound rediculous. How can continually operate without any self accountability for how you act and expect to have your input taken seriously. Who wants to listen to someone who is so blaintantly ignorant to their own faults.

Well, before we explain anything we need to first establish what we are talking about. I'm assuming you're talking about some individuals posting graphs in BBV. I would assume that most people posting their graphs are doing so to vent about losses. So we are not talking about a representative sample. Some people brag about huge wins, so I don't know where you get all. How many people are we talking about? A couple handfuls?

There are always going to be people running above expectation and those running below expectation (spadebidder has posted about this ITT). For you to make that claim you need to first show that, in fact, ALL the good players posting graphs actually do show ev lines like you say. Then you need to argue convincingly that that is a good sample (which is difficult to do). We're talking about cherrypicking here.

Then, with respect, you have misunderstood his results. Spend some more time with his site, and read his posts ITT. Anytime you rig the deal, you change the natural distribution of board cards. As you get a big enough sample, if rigging is going on, anomalies will start to show up.

You're going to need to provide some more detail in order to establish this.

I dont really use that term i prefer rigged folk.
Ill try.
That can't be helped, sorry.
I dont expect to have my input taking seriously. Fell free to make fun of my input.
idk i ask myself that sometimes and the best i can come up with is i do it for the cheese.

Ill explain it, you just lied. You are a liar. The end.

assuming makes an ass out of u and me

Like I stated before Im talking about the graphs posted in the cash regulars threads. I stated that. I said "stars regular thread". If you cant pay attention to what people are saying then you need to exit this debate. Continually ignoring what Im saying and then assuming something else is funny to me. You and others do it constantly

My Dad always said its better to sit in silence and be presumed ignorant than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

And once again where is the proof behind spadebidders samples. He doesnt provide where they came from but you so blindly put your fatih behind them. Once again more hypocritical bs.

You keep crying snake snake you dont listen to me. You just arent saying anything buddy. You contradict yourself constantly.

So is this the way you try to elevate the level of debate? Because it appears that's what Arouet's trying to do, yet this is how you respond. And he was responding to this post:

I don't see any mention of Stars regular thread there, do you? And if you mentioned it earlier, it would've been easy for Arouet to have missed it. Maybe it would've been better for you to politely explain what you meant rather than suggest that he "exit this debate" and imply that he is making an ass of himself and that he is ignorant.

If you were looking for an actual debate like you claimed you were, that is.

Man, I've been known to feed the trolls a little too much, but I'm absolutely amazed you guys are still doing it in this case. That clown is the first person I've ever bothered to put on ignore and it was clearly the right decision.

Now say "sorry I was wrong"

You guys make misatkes like this constantly only seeing what you want to see and ingnoring anything you cant explain. Weak weak weak

I would ingore me to considering the only thing you have to say comes in form of a picture.

Condescending much?

I didn't say you never said anything abut Stars regs. I pointed out that you said nothing about it in the post that Arouet was replying to:

But realizing you may have mentioned it earlier, I said that was possible but it could've been missed:

I wasn't trying to prove you wrong. I was suggesting that you were taking an extremely confrontational attitude when there was really no need to. And now you're doing the same with me.

BoBo you better ban beforee I make you look like hypocritcal ****** any further. How in the hell can you talk about my tone in which I present myself. Have you looked at any other way people post on here. ARE YOU INSANE DUDE? You cant be that blind. I almost feel like you're just trying to be difficult. Surely you are not so biased to the situation that you are gonna hold me to a completely different standard of conduct than everyone else just because they agree with you. You're a mod dude. A mod!!!! and why lol? You have the worst social skills of anyone on here lol.

The more you post the more of a joke you make yourself appear.

Seriously, I don't know what the problem is here. I was hoping that you could actually have a civil discussion with Arouet here, as I don't think he's ever berated you. I know he hasn't recently; I'm not going to bother going back and check if he ever said a bad thing about you. I know he asked you some simple, polite questions, and you come back calling him names. I've avoided name-calling as well, but now you're calling me a ****** and saying I have no social skills.

I'm suggesting you try to move beyond whatever has been said to you in the past by others, but I'm not sure if you can. I could be wrong, but I think that's what's happened with your past accounts. You get insulted by a couple of people, and then that's the end. You become confrontational with everyone, and there's just no talking to you rationally any more. It would be really cool if you could prove me wrong.

LMAO simple polite. God listen to yourself. WHenever you guys talk about eachother it makes me wanna vomit and then swallow it and vomit again. You guys are all angels lol. You handle yourselves with such class and dignity lol. God lol. This forum can be such a joke sometimes.

A few people lol. Try 85% of them lol of not more. You tell me who doesnt do it. Make a list and Ill show you 5 posts for each one that were delivered in a hostile fasion.

The funny thing is you know you're wrong. But you dont have enough character to admit to it. You cant even admit to being wrong about the Stars reg thread issue. You just tried to make some lame excuse for it. Thats what chumps do BoBo. When Ive made a mistake I admitted to it. When you said that Ive missed some of cry babies posts I admitted to it and went back to read. But you cant do that because you lack character and intergrity and for that I no longer acknowledge anything you have to say because you're a hypocrit lol.

In before I get banned for exposing another hypocrit mod

so you not part of spadeye,********.com...etc
if not, sorry then, i assume it because your 2p2 alias.

can you PM me the download link.
i'm kinda in the same boat as that person you just helped.
i think i'm getting a long term bad end of deal, but manually hand counting take alot of time.
this kind of checking software, can really help me improve my game as i can focus on the players and not the beats.

Could you quote a post where Arouet wasn't polite? Don't be a hypocrite now make sure you apologize if you cant.

Is this really the strategy now? Continue calling me names instead of answering Arouet's questions? I fail to see how his questions aren't simple or polite, but I won't argue with you about it.

I have no idea how many people have insulted you. What I said was that it only takes a couple before there's no talking rationally to you anymore. I'm sure a lot more than that have insulted you since you started trading insults with them.

I do know that in the span of two of your posts, I've been called a ******, a joke, a chump, a hypocrite, and been told I have no social skills, character, or integrity. Gee, I wonder why you don't get positive responses to your posts.

And no, sorry, I don't know that I'm wrong about that post, or I would admit it. Feel free to explain in a logical manner how you came to that conclusion.

What about this is any different in the way that I post. And he is on the calmer side of all of you. ANd how many times do I have to answer his posts until it counts. 5? 10? do I have to answer the same question 32 times for it to count once? If im getting annoyed its because everytime I enter this thread its the same story. Its people like BoBo making no sense. Twisting everything to make a lame arguement. Aroulet constantly saying that I havetn answered his questions when I have. ANd then when I do he ignores the content of my answers and ASSUMES instead. Its rediculous. You guys make yourselves sound rediculous. Its nice that youve chased out most of the people in my side of the debate so more people arent here to point it out to you.

And BoBo I stand behind every name I called you. You are the poster child for all 4 of them. You might be the worst contribution to their side of the debate in this thread. You might wanna sit out a few plays.

Um, seriously?

Well, we could start with the fact that he hasn't insulted you 3 or 4 times in any of those posts. In fact, he never did in any of those posts.

Still hes not the spokesman for all of you. Like I said he does the least of it but still makes errors that are just as bad in another way.

And once again I stand behind that you are a ******ed hypocritcal joke chump mod. You deserve the title buddy. Gotta give it to ya.

There were no insults in those posts, you use personal insults. Try again.

You have to be just playing around, you cant be real.

OK, cool.

Let me explain why your rationale is not only wrong, but the underlying motive for this is not even there.
This idea of miracle rivers is a very separate idea to the idea of action hands. You need to slow down and think about this stuff critically.

The idea of action hands is that the pre-flop cards or the flop cards are designed to induce lots of betting.

The idea of turn or river cards favouring particular players is based upon redistributing who wins.

Can you understand that there is a key and fundamental difference between these two very separate allegations/ideas?

Let me now explain why both are false ideas: the first one actually contradicts your motive because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how transactional sites - whether it being gambling or poker or whatever - make their money. The second is simply impossible on PokerStars.

Why action hands hurt the profitability of online poker sites
The people who make these claims don't even realise that what they are saying is self-contradictory.

You can't simultaneously claim that there are Action Flops (to increase betting) while claiming that the purpose is to keep bad players in the game longer. "Action flops" increase betting, and increase variance... and the greater the pot size and the bigger the variance, the faster the fish go bust.

This is like someone pointing at a green wall, saying it is black, and in the next breath, they're claiming it is white. Not only are both claims wrong and false, but they're also internally self-contradictory.

People can claim to have action flops (to generate action/rake) or people can claim that there's a plot to keep bad players in the game longer. You can have one or the other - not both, because one stops the other from happening.

All gambling operations - online or offline - make their money from churn. They make money by having people repeatedly wager it over and over and over.

So, therefore, a site would generally profit more from low variance situations than high variance situations.

Therefore - and this is now self-evident - a site is actually harmed by bigger pots. A site is actually better off (relatively speaking) with 100 pots of $1, than one pot of $100. The same principle applies to roulette, slot machines, and so on.

Now, what are "action hands"? Action hands are high variance situations: where the rake is capped and there is lots of betting. We have just proved that high variance situations are not good for the site, and therefore, we have proved that action hands are not good for the site. Thus, there is simply no motive for a site to generate action hands: if anything, there would be motive to generate anti-action hands.

Why It Is Impossible for the Flop/Turn/River Card To Favour Particular Players on Sites With a "Static" Shuffle

Once the cards are shuffled then, just like live casinos, the deck is set and then dealt. Since computer can have no way of knowing what players will do (obviously impossible to predict the fufture), the server has no way of conjuring up special boards for their play.

See here for more information: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=498

Of course, this does not apply to sites with a continuous shuffle. That's then an issue to raise with them.

Your own argument is internally contradictory: if sites wanted to keep fish alive longer and were willing to fiddle with the shuffle to do this, they would cause pots to be smaller, not bigger.

TLDR /\
ll

Just wanted to put in the friendly reminder that josem works for POKER STARS lol