Grunch.

I don't say poker is rigged but I think poker sites do have an incentive to rig the games, in order to produce more suckouts and bad beats.

1) which kind of player are in the majority, the shark or the fish? The fish. It has been said that the ratio of fish to winning player is of roughly 20 to 1 (95% loses money)

2) who sucks out more?: the fish. They put money in bad more often than the good player does, therefore they suck out more often than the good player does (you can't suck out if you put your money in good, DUCY).

3) Who reloads more?: The fish.

Then, do poker rooms have an incentive to rig decks in order to generate more suck outs and bad beats? yes, they do.

Right, no one will dispute that Cereus poker was incompetent and/or corrupt. And they may be still. What's your point?

No, your post made pretty much no sense.

Why? You're the one making ridiculous accusations, how about you run the numbers.

I don't think this word means what you think it means.

And it wasn't all that funny, either.

Well, please spill the details, so we can learn what sites to avoid.

It made perfect sense. I can explain it to you if youd like?

I supplied numbers after being told id never do it and those numbers were ignored. I can only assume why.

Do you really think you are going to get paid if proof comes out that the sites are in fact rigged? I don't think so, because you are not going to collect from people who are either behind bars or looking for another job.

If you want to start keeping an eye on the stats, start keeping an eye on the times you are all in for your tournament life the heavy favorite (3-1 or better) against a larger stack. Collect lots of these hands and see if you are running anywhere near expectation. If something is wrong here, then you might have some proof. You are going to need a lot of hands though.

This being said, as of right now, my position is that of a neutral bystander enjoying the comedy of this catch 22 situation unfolding and refolding back up daily here in this thread.

Yep. Anytime he wants to admit that online poker is not rigged he is welcome to do so.

....I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

This might well have been "said", but it is wrong.

Literally every piece of data published on this forum puts the proportion of winning players between 20% and 40%.
This seems to be true.
By definition this must be the case: a winning player doesn't deposit much, they withdraw. That's inherent to the definitions of winning/losing players.
Statement #1 is false. Statements #2 and #3, while true, have no relevance to your conclusion.

Further, even if there was a motive to rig decks, that is not in itself evidence that a crime has been committed.

For example, judging by the posts in this thread, there are many rigtards who do not have critical thinking skills. Consequently, they are not likely to be very good at playing poker. Thus, they have a motive to steal to fund their poker losses. The fact that they have a motive to commit crimes is not in itself evidence that a crime has taken place, much less that they are guilty of it as individuals.

I believe I made clear in the first line of my post that this is not what I am saying.

Please link me to those post, to have a meaninful discussion.

Althought I am waiting for confirmation on your numbers, the first premise, namely "the majority of payers lose money", can not be false, even if your more optimistic assumption is true (60% of a population is a majority iyam). So the conlcusion that poker sites do have an incentive to rig the games as stated in my first post is perfectly fine.

Josem let me ask you a question. Do you consider UB and AP bad places to play poker? Would you in a sense say that you feel the same way about them that rigtards feel about online poker in general?

Actually, as a side argument, this analogy presents a problem. The rig tards do have an incentive to steal, as in your reasoning, and maybe if some of them are busto, or in great need, or whatever, if they are in the right place at the right moment, they will commit the crime with certain likelihood. And they will commit the crime much more often than in any typical social/legal scenario if they know that there is almost zero chance of being caught and being punished if that ever happens... Do you see the whole analogy now?

I don't really want to comment on other specific sites as much as possible. Given I work for a competitor of theirs, I'd rather not express personal opinions on such things generally.
Here's one such discussion: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32.../#post16980110

Why does one follow from the other?

I agree that such sites have a motive to steal, but that applies to everyone. My electricity company has a motive to steal, but I don't start threads on the internet accusing them of fiddling with my electricity meter.

If I did, the first response would be "how do you know this?"

If I then said "I feel that I didn't use that much electricity" I would be derided as much as the riggies in this thread.

Also, your premise about not being caught is false: sites have been repeatedly caught doing the wrong thing because it is easy to get caught and there are lots of people watching.

I am sorry? I wil respost it for you, with the correction of the % of winning players:
Please be clear and point where is the logical flaw of this reasoning.

Different poker sites definitely have different software to deal cards. Pokerroom and pokerstars come very close to realistic hands and flops, resulting in much weaker hands on average winning pots. Top pair with a good kicker or an over pair are huge, similar to live games.

Doyles room and full tilt, in my opinion have an action based software, resulting in much stronger hands winning the pot. Resulting in straights and flush's dominate the hand that win pots.

Keep in mind that I play short handed limit poker to narrow my variance. Also if you have ever played with me or know me, I am the last person in the world who would think the sites are rigged. When i get bad beats, I smile knowing that eventually I will make tons off that person. I don't lecture them or bad mouth them. I even say NH to them. I don't want them to leave my table ever.

I have been playing poker live and on the internet for over 20 years and I have never had a losing week. Granted that I play a ton so I will pull a 60 hour session to make sure I don't lose. On full tilt, I just had the worst run ever multiplied by 20 K. I lost almost every day for about 2 months. All the hands I lose with are over pairs, top pair, or top 2, with some monkey capping all the way to hit a 2-14 outer or runner runner to beat me. The last straw for me was a few weeks ago. I was playing 4 handed for almost 2 hours and every hand I entered I flopped top pair, top 2, or a set which i lost 95% of the hands to straights or better. The amount I lost in this time frame was over 20 K. I couldn't have lost that much if I wanted to. If i played every hand dealt to me and played blindfolded I would have had better results.

On pokerroom and pokerstars I averaged between 2-7 K in withdrawals a week, limited at 7K, because the neteller debit card's daily limit was 1K. I have been playing FT full time around April of last year. The only reason I am a winner is only because of the rake back.

Maybe you could say I was playing poorly during this mathematically impossible down swing. Now that I moved back to pokerstars, I am winning consistently again. I still play a little fulltilt for to keep my ironman status, but I'm about to stop playing FT permanently soon. So now that I'm playing both sites at the same time, my game should be a constant denominator in this equation and you will find that I steadily win, slowly but surely, on pokerstars and in the meantime I am losing at a tremendously fast rate on FT considering the amount of hands I play for my ironman points.

If you play FT, you will see a ton of people timing down when they are blind posting or clicking their action button. Why do they do it? I know that FT's deck is supposedly being constantly being shuffled. Do some people have some kind of program or system that tells them how long to wait to click the action button? Sounds absolutely ridiculous, I know. But then why do so many people do it?

Until these sites are strictly regulated, who knows what they do. You and I have absolutely no idea what they are capable of. They are pretty much free to do whatever they wish.

OK well will you let us assume something along those lines by already stated/implied opinions of them as quoted herein?

Isn't the logical reasoning much simpler than all that?

1) More money is better than less money

2) Anything to get more money is therefore good, and therefore, you have a motive.


The points I'd make about your motives is:

1) The frequency of fish is not relevant to a motive. If 60% of players were winners, it wouldn't affect the motive.

2) This seems truistic, and self-evident.

3) Same as #2.

Those reasons don't actually generate a motive.


Also, I suspect that in the medium-term, stealing money from your players would act against your interests because you would have less customers than if you didn't steal from your customers. You'll only benefit in the short-term if you do that stuff, because you'll get caught.

Yes, it is fair to assume I do not think highly of UB/AP.

They probably are stealing. But there is no forum to go complain to.

Then start up a website like 'truenergycheats.com' or something. Or your local newspaper or other media outlet.

I did that and ended with 50,000 website hits in a single day.

This is what drives me up a wall. And its what fuels the shill accusations. How can you not see that if there are more making money than are losing it would euqal less depositing of new money into the site, that this in fact matters tremendously?


Can you at least admit that less depositing would mean less profit? Are we on the same page at that autoonmous idea at least? Or do you not agree that a finite pool of money would eventually get raked out?

And further more im not afraid to admit this to you this from experience. When you are playing with your last 100$ or 20$ or whatever your last bankroll ends up to, you are payng less rake and lower stakes than at that fresh 600$ deposit.

Actually, is much easier to prove that your electricity provider made abusive carges or ripped you of or whatever than it is to prove that poker is rigged.



Is a very well known fact that if the proper incentives are provided, people will behave in certain ways. Being caught in the internet is much less of a deterrent that its real life counter part is. So being caught on the internet almost doesnt really counts. What really counts is punishment. If you don't believe so, take a look at AP/UB and try figuring out why not a single person has payed for their wrongdoing.

Right now my focus is on poker sites cheat but maybe for my next project I will look into that.

Doesn't really matter to me. I think I understand the point you were trying to make, but the conclusions you drew were fairly ridiculous and made no sense IMO. If you care to explain it, go ahead and explain how qpw's post proves all and means this thread can be closed now.

Really have no idea what these numbers mean, but I have no idea why you can't just admit your 98% figure was hyperbole, and move on. I know it was, so I'm moving on.

I know I feel AP & UB are bad places to play poker because I have actual documented proof of different shady crap they've pulled. If a riggie could provide me with something like that for another poker site, they might sway my opinion. It's really not that hard to understand. I have an open mind, but I need some kind of evidence to start believing someone is ripping me (or other players) off.

So therefore, they should make it so that more people lose money?

I think the purpose of this alleged rigging was to reduce how many people lose money?
Why does rigging cause there to be more depositing?
I don't think this is right.

I don't have the ability to check my electricity meter. I do have the ability to check various parameters of online poker being fair.



Well, they were fined, but that highlights a problem with the regulation.

Thus play at a properly regulated site.

Come on youve already heard it 1000 times. Why is it that you guys reset back to "I never heard this before" mode every few pages??

By rewarding loose play early and letting it tilt out later they give the highs that keeps the deposits coming and generating more rake int he process. If bad players came in and lost right away thered be less deposits. I know youve heard this, why are you pretending not to have? I mean even if you dont think they are doing it surely you can see that this is how the logic would go if there was a rig on. If you cant then everything you do for the study of hands is invalid imo and you just fluked out that the UB/AP hand history had the plain site usernames and hole cards and ip addresses and that investigation fell right into your lap with no work needed.