See the post above the one you quoted.

A gentleman of affairs such as tk1133 cannot be expected to keep up with minor developments if countries such as the former USSR.

They are foreign for God's sake.

Ah ha, so tk1133 wants to see a tax introduced into online poker for Americans. Makes sense.

The USA have enacted legislation that makes it necessary to play poker underground?

The amount of money the USA ships abroad every month in payment for goods and services is colossal. Any of it could be used to fund terrorism (as, indeed, could any that remains within its shores). So are you happy for the USA to continue as a trading nation and risk funding terrorism? Makes sense.

Thanks for my morning laugh.

Of course, anything the director of one of the largest spying organisations in the world says must be honest and accurate.

tk1133, you really are the poster child for the insanely gullible.

No need to get so defensive (although I can see why some of the responses may make you feel like that). People are just responding to tk1133's ridiculous xenophobia and credulous expectations of the US government.

Trying to get through to someone as dense as he is requires special efforts.

I think this is the only real advantage that would accrue to US citizens from having a poker site on US soil. (As opposed to just dropping awkward ancillary legislation).

And, if you think about it, it would benefit the scumbags a lot more than it would benefit honest players.

Yeah, guess it just struck a nerve.

It is a bit of a double-edged sword, isn't it?

smithcommajohn

I just wanted to say as a poster I really respect your level headed views and responses on this thread. I think Josem, Arouet, Spadebidder and yourself are all very level headed and logical thinkers and I wish I had the same trait.

Basically, I'm sorry if I came across as offensive with my talk about the U.S government but that wasn't my intention at all.

I only was trying to alert TK and a few other rigtards to the fact that life does exist outside America and the only way I felt I could get through to them was to take a strong line like I did.

If you check my earlier posts in this thread I tried to talk sense and logic but it just didn't work. Then with me being terminally impatient when it comes to things like this, I decided to be blunt with the rigtards and explain it in black and white.

I mean obviously, I don't agree with everything the Amercian government does, but the same can be said for my own government in Australia and also many, many others around the world.

I don't want you to get the wrong idea that I hate the U.S because I don't. In fact it is probably one my favourite countries in the world and that's the reason I'm going to move there ( and to gamble in Vegas of course )

Just wanted to say sorry for being a twit and I hope I didn't offend you

Peace

Somehow, I don't think you're over it, but I'm certain the rigtards won't miss the insults.

I suggest that rigtards be called skeptics, and the other side can be believers, and the rest can be called middlers. Calling names doesn't do much good.

Meh. I'm sticking with:

Riggies = People who have concerns and argue intelligently.
Rigtards = Riggies who ignore answers and ask the same question again a couple of days later or who respond to explanations by calling the respondent 'shill'.

You have it exactly backwards.

Skeptics is not a good name for riggies. While on one definition they can be seen to be "skeptical" (that is, they doubt that online poker is legit), a skeptic really is a critical thinker who only draws conclusions based on reliable evidence- which does NOT describe the riggies very well.

Nor does "believer" really give justice to the non-riggies position: it entails that they believe there are no problems no matter what, when in reality they are the ones acting like true skeptics.

"Undecideds" would be much better than middlers for the rest.

- Skip this if you are going to complain about reading a bad beat story -

I just do not know what to say...

This is just one example in one game but omfg it is like another cherry on top. I guess I have to stay away from Full Tilt even longer or altogether.

I am currently playing on another site and my luck swings both ways. I have almost doubled my first deposit in one week but on Full Tilt, I am just trying to minimize losses or break even.

So I find that I have some FTP points in my old account and I decide to play a SitnGo for a tournament chip. The payout is only 1 place but I am more playing it to try and build my confidence for the site.

So I am playing really tight and finally get to heads up.

Here is how the last hand played out:

Note: The villian had raised or gone all in previous 4 hands for which I had folded.

Full Tilt Poker Game: Tier One 600 FTP Sit & Go, Table 1 - 80/160 - No Limit Hold'em - 10:51:55 ET - 2010/02/18
Seat 1: Hero (3,219)
Seat 7: Villian (10,281)
Hero posts the small blind of 80
Villian posts the big blind of 160
The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [Ah Ac]
Hero calls 80
Villian raises to 320
Hero has 15 seconds left to act - (notice I am trying give him the impression I am making a move)
Hero raises to 480
Villian raises to 640
Hero raises to 800
Villian raises to 960
Hero raises to 3,219, and is all in
Villian calls 2,259
Hero shows [Ah Ac]
Villian shows [Ks Kh]
*** FLOP *** [Js 2s 7c]
Hero: sick
*** TURN *** [Js 2s 7c] [Kd] (Yeah I almost spat my coffee all over my screen)
*** RIVER *** [Js 2s 7c Kd] [3c]
Villian: lol
Hero shows a pair of Aces
Villian shows three of a kind, Kings
Villian wins the pot (6,438) with three of a kind, Kings
Hero: good times
Hero stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 6,438 | Rake 0
Board: [Js 2s 7c Kd 3c]
Seat 1: Hero (small blind) showed [Ah Ac] and lost with a pair of Aces
Seat 7: Villian (big blind) showed [Ks Kh] and won (6,438) with three of a kind, Kings

Of course this is not any proof of rigging and by my current thinking is I just run the worst anybody can possibly run on Full Tilt. I think at one point, I was rated the 3rd biggest loser at the stakes for which I was playing and my PTR grade was an A.

My results on Full Tilt and the new site are like night and day.

~Cheers

That implies something different than the real attitude of most players, which is they don't have any reason to suspect that they are not getting a fair game. That doesn't imply total trust, it just means you aren't actively skeptical and have no reason to be. That doesn't mean you never question anything, but you don't dwell on it unless there is a reason to. Sort of like the default position that reasonable people have about most things in life.

I'd go with "normal".

BBV is that way ---->

fair enough...

No worries, man. TK seems to bring out the worst in people. If he is a gimmick account, he's doing his job well.

Only a fool would think the US (or any country, for that matter) is perfect, but it's my country, so I'll always love and honor it. If you do end up coming here to live, I think you'll see what I mean. Incidentally, I hope you reach your goals in coming to Vegas.

Water under the bridge, my friend.

In reference to my first game back on Full Tilt playing heads up getting AA on the button and facing KK all in preflop on the payout bubble.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

221 to 1, he is dealt KK and 204 to 1 that I am then dealt AA.

So ~ 45,000 to 1

Then he goes to the flop as 4 to 1 underdog.

After the flop it gets worse and he is approaching a 7 to 1 underdog having only two outs.

Yeah, of course I see this stuff in live poker but the frequency is just really hard to believe when I play on Full Tilt and it begs the question.

Is the deal legit?

The 80%+ favorite bad beats are uncanny.

Very probably.

At the risk of sounding rigtarded, you're talking about something I call a "Game Ender". These hands serve one purpose, to end the game NOW. Both players are given a hand so strong, it cannot be folded either preflop or postflop. I posted a similar experience earlier in this thread where I was the shorter stack with JJ and the big stack had TT. We were both all-in preflop and he hit his T on the flop, game over.

Do these happen more frequently than expected? I don't know, but it happens enough I think it's worth looking into.

This perfectly illustrates the problem that people like Spadebidder and myself who can actually write software have when considering whether it's worth trying to come up with something to help show a fair deal.

I haven't heard of this theory before but if a quite reasonable poster such as Smith, John can bring this up, just imagine how may other scenarios a real 24 carat 'tard can come up with.

Even if I had programmed tests for all of the dozens and dozens (perhaps hundreds) of other possible 'rigs' I have heard of and hypothesised myself not one of them would have caught this!

There's a few things wrong here. The only probability that matters in this hand is the equity when the money went in. Villain was approximately 18% to win. There is no probability on any other street (no other streets are even played), as the money is done and the rest of the cards are all dealt at once. The logistical matter of exposing them one at a time has nothing whatsoever to do with his chance to win. He is 18% to win, PERIOD.

The chance to first be dealt AA vs KK is also irrelevant. It happened, so it's a given. When you have AA, about 4% of the time somebody else at a 9-player table is going to have KK. It is going to happen regularly and isn't relevant to the point.

This hand in isolation simply means you lost as a 4:1 favorite. For that to mean anything, you need to count all the times you were all-in preflop as a 4:1 favorite, and see if you lost pretty close to 20% of the time. If you have a few hundred such hands, I guarantee you it will be close.

Looked at in isolation, every single poker hand dealt is an amazing near-unique event. Count how many ways the hole cards and board cards can be dealt. You will never in your life see them all.

Gee, I am sorry that king on a turn cost you so much, you must be the only one who has lost in that way. Oh wait...


PokerStars Game #36126865706: Tournament #234010572, $50+$5 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XXVI (10000/20000) - 2009/12/01 22:07:41 ET
Table '234010572 69' 9-max Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: illmatic1402 (1931135 in chips)
Seat 2: joepokerhead (261496 in chips)
Seat 3: Monteroy (215275 in chips)
Seat 5: TheOracleAA (624942 in chips)
Seat 6: zetsu90 (539698 in chips)
Seat 7: Maattedyret (1567036 in chips)
Seat 8: QTgirlE3 (735312 in chips)
Seat 9: lijfie (1064106 in chips)
illmatic1402: posts the ante 2000
joepokerhead: posts the ante 2000
Monteroy: posts the ante 2000
TheOracleAA: posts the ante 2000
zetsu90: posts the ante 2000
Maattedyret: posts the ante 2000
QTgirlE3: posts the ante 2000
lijfie: posts the ante 2000
QTgirlE3: posts small blind 10000
lijfie: posts big blind 20000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Monteroy [7c 9s]
illmatic1402: folds
joepokerhead: raises 40000 to 60000
Monteroy: folds
TheOracleAA: folds
zetsu90: folds
Maattedyret: folds
QTgirlE3: folds
lijfie: calls 40000
*** FLOP *** [8c 6d Ah]
lijfie: bets 1002106 and is all-in
joepokerhead: calls 199496 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (802610) returned to lijfie
*** TURN *** [8c 6d Ah] [Ks]
*** RIVER *** [8c 6d Ah Ks] [5c]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
lijfie: shows [Th Ad] (a pair of Aces)
joepokerhead: shows [Kh Kc] (three of a kind, Kings)
illmatic1402 said, "wow"
joepokerhead collected 544992 from pot
zetsu90 said, "unreal"

That one ended up costing me $1,200+ ( I was the next one out on another bad beat for what it is worth)


Stop whining and creating "the world is against me" paranoid beliefs about standard bad beats that happen tons of times a day because mathematically they should happen tons of times a day.

You lost in a freeroll worth a few bucks due to a 2 out turn card. I lost $1k+ and other players have lost a ton more than both of us in the exact same way.

Until you grow up you will never be able to be a successful long term player. You actually play and may have potential, many of the other riggies are complete lost causes, but until you change the way you approach the game you will just be what are as seen in how you treat the situation:

You are a player who lives in the emotional moment, creates meaningless stats to rationalize a situation, and personifies a bad beat as if there is an actual force directed at you behind it.

You have zero chance of ever being a winning player with that baggage.


All the best.

The intellectual elitism on the this board is truly amusing sometimes.

You can write software OMG amazing. I bet there is a large percentage of players on this message board that are in the software/computer industry that could say the same thing including myself.

It is the ones who use it as a form of "I am smarter than you" who are probably doing tech support.

Ok, ok that was just trying razz ya a bit.

I am not sure the motivations of people who try to get nasty with their comments to counter the suspicions of online poker being a possibly unfair game.

Of course the equity preflop is all that matters when you evaluate an all in scenario. However, I still do find that since there is no way the person could complete a flush or straight and was down to only two cards on the turn or river interesting when the scenario is only dealt heads up approximately every 45k hands.

"The chance to first be dealt AA vs KK is also irrelevant. It happened, so it's a given."

Sorry bud. I could be dealt AA ten times in a row and you could use the same argument but it is another interesting fact about the hand that should not be ignored. You should actually be using these percentages when thinking about pushing when the blinds are high in tournaments (as I am sure you also know) so your comments on this topic are clearly skewed to discount my feelings on the matter.

You know I was not playing in a 9 handed game yet you use this as an example. Nice try.

"This hand in isolation simply means you lost as a 4:1 favorite."

Of course that is why I had previously posted, "Then he goes to the flop as 4 to 1 underdog.".

Try again but this time make it even nastier.