even if the rng is not completely random, doesnt that mean its not completely random for everyone? how is anyone at a disadvantage and how do poker sites profit from it not being random?

RIGGED TO SHYT SIMPLE AS. SOOOOOO RIGGED IT AINT EVEN POSSIBLE

Do tell us your story.

To expand further...

Let's assume the poker rooms have hardware rng.
Now, let' not assume that the output from said hardware rng is then sent through software. To say it is not would invalidate anything you say since we're all playing through software.

now, let's assume that the output from hardware isn't what the software wants it to be, for whatever reason.

Let's assume the software collects x amount of info from each table, and x amount of info from each player at each table.

let's assume that the software can determine that player b is more likely to deposit more money after losing his/her bankroll than player c is. Player B is a tight player who doesn't really advance or decline one way or another.

So let's assume that the software is cheating in order to gain more money per deposit.

If all of the above is true, then it doesn't matter what the hardware originally spits out.

The reason for this is because the software is designed to know that so long as player b wins x amount of hands, but ultimately loses more than he wins, he will make another deposit.

Assuming all of the above is the case, player b will ultimately lose more when the odds are in his favor, because the software knows he will simply deposit more money anyway.

now, of course there are other factors in place, such as those starting with nothing and making it big. Sure.. this can happen, and happen a lot, for 2 reasons. First, it would assist in removing any suspicion that said poker software is cheating. Secondly, it would give those who are habitual depositors hope that one day they can "make it big", with the end result that they keep chasing the dream and depositing money.

Now, the above is one hell of a scenario, but when you're talking millions of players and billions of dollars in play a day, it is not something that can be ignored without true data. The problem with this is, how do we know the data we are being shown is true? As is with any other money scam, we will be shown what the company/person/entity wants us to see. So we are ultimately left with either believing or disbelieving what other people on the internet tells/shows us.

And please.. let's not bring the "auditors" into the above scenario... Because all it would take to pass an "audit" is a few changes to a few variables in the code of the software...


Just because the claim of "hardware rng" is there, doen't mean it cannot be altered after passing a ton of other data through the software.

And again... yes, we're talking extremes... but look at what we're really talking about... online gambling. Gambling itself carries a great level of risk.. now let's take the face to face level of risk gamblings brings.. then let's pass it through some software that serves more players than any live table would, and can determine more about each player than any live table ever could... And "decisions" of what cards to deal to whom at what time can be made simply based on data from each player.

Well that's a novel interpretation. I probably won't have much else of value to offer you in the way of debate, because I can't compete with that.

Sorry, cjhmdm

Can I just confirm that you are snakes's new gimmick?

Thanks.

You do realise that you are certifiably insane?

http://www.who.is/whois/cjhmdm.com/
send me an email at chris (at) the above domain.. I've said this already....

Do you have a doctorate, or even a PHD in psychology?

Please don't think that anything you say has no value.. I genuinely take everything into consideration, especially from the opposite side of a debate..

In the event you are trying to disprove me.. take above example and apply it to only 100 people. You will find that 95% (or more) of the time, the end result will be completely different than the original...

These are facts, and anyone who wants to argue said facts is free to conduct an experiment on their own.

how does this apply? Well, if man to man to 1 million men cannot send the exact same bit of data down the line, then how can we expect software, written by man, to? Especially when there a million other variables to consider, and tons of other data for those variables?

As a person descends further and further into madness the qualifications required to reach a diagnosis diminish.

In the case of anyone observing your outpourings watching Monty Python's 'Spot the Loony' sketch forty years ago suffices.

in b4 lulz

I thought we'd reached a nadir of imbecility with snake (the little charmer), but I see cjhmdm has upped the stakes.

Darn, no more fun recipes

(And I think he actually got banned this morning - its just that his last non-deleted post was last night)

Except that I am basing my arguments off of completely viable scenarios. So again, do you have a doctorate, or even a phd, in psychology? If not then you are merely stating your opinion of me, not fact.

If you cannot disprove what I am saying the please refrain from retorting to childish name calling.

I am merely providing real world, truly possible scenarios. And unless you have an adult argument that goes against my scenario, then you shouldn't even bother posting.

After all, we're not talking about some small time company(ies) who profit $5 a day from their poker rooms. These are multi-billion dollar industries, in which the level of trust we ultimately rely on is the software written by each company. And at the end of the day, they do not host these rooms because you enjooy playing poker.. no, they host these rooms for profit.. and they will do whatever it takes to make a profit; regardless of how "immoral" it may be.

No we're saying that since there have been 0% indication so far that there's something wrong with the deal we think it's probably legit.

Do you see the difference?

[QUOTE=cjhmdm;17053550]I'll also say, once again, that I do believe these poker rooms cheat people in the end... but my opinion is just an opinion, my belief a belief. If I can pull enough data on my own that can either prove, or change my opinion, then I will. I'm only sharing this here because it's boring to go at it alone.. and maybe, just maybe some of the naysayers will change their views if they see some real data, no matter how irrelevant it may be to all you "pros", from an average nobody.

again, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I'll have no problem admitting this.[/QUOTEone way to make sure you are not "doomswitched" is to post here the fact you are investigating the practice.

Now that I've said what I wanted to say regarding my personal beliefs/opinions on this matter, I am done posting in this thread, once I respond to any replies made before this one. If any of you on the opposite side of the debate wish to continue a real, adult, intelligent conversation with me on the matter, please PM me. I've fed the trolls enough and I'm all out of food.

PS. While most of you who have argued against me may be cheering in victory, just remember that you have not proven me wrong. I've simply decided to stop adding logical opinions and views to a debate where the opposite side can only offer flames and "high five" material.

Stroke your e-peen more in the public section all you want.. so far not a single one of you on the opposite sid of the debate has given any input that even begins to dissuade the real world scenatios that I have given...

Does anyone else remember the 'Spot the Loony' sketch?

cjhmdm could easily (albeit anachronistically), have been the inspiration.

Do you have anything other than childish insults to contribute to your side of the debate? If not then you aren't worth the time it took for you to think up such an elementary, self proclaimed witty reply...

Probably for the best.

Why would any sane person want to do that?

At 17:15 cjhmdm said:
Then at 17:19, responding to a post made after the one quoted above:

So you are a lying liar who tells lies.

We get a lot of those on the 'tard side of this thread.

It blows my mind that this guy is allowed to blaintantly harass people on a daily basis and the moderators simply ignore it.

Did anyone understand the part about an RNG being like this?



That's a new twist for sure.

Someone's got a shiny new gimmick account.