I also think it is entirely possible that the RNG is 100% legit, just that someone or something has figured it out and the perpetrators are smart about not getting caught.

Fish suckout more, their losing play is rewarded, they lose in the long run, they redeposit. Rinse, repeat.

Fish are the majority of the population of players in any poker room, and they bring the fresh money. How are the sites not interested in keeping them?
If you deny that you are basically denying a basic fact of how poker economy works.


For most of people checking an electricity meter could be learned in a couple of days.

How would you prove that the underdog is not hitting its outs more than it should?

Getting caught in the internet really doesnt matter that much, specially in an unregulated market like this, (go check AP/UB) as it doesnt warrant any legal punishment. Also, I maintain that proving poker being rigged is much more difficut than proving that one player is winning way above the mean.

Ah, at least we now know why you're insane.

How can you not see the glaring flaw (an assumption you have made) in the above?

Again there is a major glaring error in that assertion.

I'll let you have a little think about these errors and see if you can work them out for yourself.

lol logicaments!

Go ahead and rip into it. You got nothing. Thats why you speak like this. I can do it it too if I want

"There is a MAJOR flaw in the RNG you guys arent seeing. I'll let you figure it out".

ROFLMAO.

The sad thing is that you really, truly, believe that the two things are equivalent.

As you seem to be a little hard of thinking I suppose I'll have to explain it simply:

"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?"

WRONG!

It really is excruciatingly simple - how could it happen? More people make small amounts of money than a few losing larger amounts.

"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?

Again, really, really, simple. How can this not be the case? Well, if the 'less depositing' is matched or more than matched by 'less withdrawing', then the site will make the same or more.

All you riggies who are spending so much time discussing the motives of the poker sites, you should spend some time reading the Stoxtrader alleged cheating thread in HSNL.

Try to note how much time is spent on motives and how much time is devoted to people pulling up stats and discussing them. Look at how individuals showing detailed stats based on their own handhistories. Look at the discussion and debate over sample size.

Will the end result prove collusion? I don't know. It's the process you folks should be concerned about.

Motives aren't very useful in these types of discussions: all they do is establish whether it makes sense that a certain individual committed a certain act. Let's ITT just accept that the sites have motive to rig, for the sake of the argument. Let's put that completely behind us, because once you've established motive, it serves no more useful purpose in proving your allegations.

Riggies: the sites have motive to rig. Ok, we've established it.

Now: how they gonna rig without getting caught? If they have can't rig without getting caught: why has no one caught them? If its just because no one has tried? Then you try. Come up with a hypothesis, test it, see where we get.

But STFU about motives, kai?

Ok today I was able to hex out the call to a bitmap screenshot from a mid size site's client exe(not ps or ft). It's about 1mb in size. I was surprised because I was expecting compression in jpg format for sending over the net. I was then able to pick some of it out of its memory space and surely enough i was enough to recognize some elements of my desktop on it. More to come.

And the connection between a poker client program allegedly taking screen shots on your computer and a rigged "RNG" is ????????

Can you post that in a way that makes some kind of sense?

Are you saying you intercepted a packet from the client to the server via TCP/IP sniffing?

And are you further saying that it was sending a snapshot of part of your desktop to the poker site?

If you are this is the wrong thread. This is about sites rigging the deal, not sites snooping on their customers.

You just beat me to it.

There's a reason we call them 'tards.

Who said there had to be? I dont even care about the RNG.

Let's take this one step at a time:

1) This is a site with forums.

2) Forums are split into different subject areas to reflect their content.

3) A forum is composed of 'threads'.

4) Threads are used to keep different subjects (reasonably) tidy and segregated from other subjects.

5) Some people are too ******ed to appreciate this and post information in a thread that is not relevant to the content of the thread.

6) You are just such a ******.


Edit: This link take you to a page that could well have been made for you.

No, that's not what I said. But I guess it doesnt really matter all that much in the end.

That's debatable imo. Screenshots can be used to rig. I dont know what they are using them for if at all so...

I dont see ''RNG'' anywhere in the thread title. Therefore you might be the ****** in your story.

I didn't mention the RNG.

Try and just read what's written rather than imagining what might have been written and responding to that.

YOu did mention the RNG by quoting someone else who mentioned the RNG...are you ****ing kidding me? You cant even keep track of wtf you say yourself. I laugh at you. I point and I laugh right at you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by obviously.bogus
And the connection between a poker client program allegedly taking screen shots on your computer and a rigged "RNG" is ????????

YOU
You just beat me to it.

There's a reason we call them 'tards.

You see, in English, we read from left to right and from the the top down.

Where I said you were in the wrong thread was before I quoted the person who mentioned the RNG.

In any case, the fact that he was a little to specific in his interpretation has no bearing on the fact that you were too ******ed to realise that even though the thread is not restricted to RNG matters your post was outside its stated remit.

Inane giggling is a fairly standard response from the ******ed who don't really have a clue about what's going on.

Well it doesnt surprise me that you cant see how a screenshot could help rig. You dont see much else at all so it makes sense.

It seems that everyone agrees that there are incentives for a poker room to keep fish reloading and bringing fresh money. How would rigging the games accomplish this goal? Losing play is rewarded throught suck outs and "good" beats, fish lose in the long run, fish redeposit. Rinse, repeat. A poker site full of sharks just doesnt work (if you don't believe so, go check what was happening to ipoker when their smaller skins were attracting mostly sharks with their 50% rackeback deals).

Hopefully this is fairly obvious.

How about the "getting caught" factor? It only means something if it has consequences. The AP/UB case showed that there are amost zero consequences for being caught cheating. And, I have yet to hear how would you prove that the underdog is not hitting its outs more ofthen than it should. I am very interested in this part, because the likelihood of reaching conclusive proof of a site being rigged is inversely proportional to the dificulty of the task.

hand histories, use them, do some research

Is it just me or is the quality of the rigtards getting ever worse?

In what way would a site taking a shot of your screen help them to rig anything? They already know everything they need to about the particular hand.

Perhaps you'd like to explain what benefit a site could get when attempting to rig things for or against a player by taking a screenshot?

That's why I put "RNG" in quotes. I think this thread is supposed to be related to the rigging of the deal, whether it is doom/boomswitch, action hole cards (AA vs KK etc), action flops, suckout river cards etc etc etc. Since the RNG is the mechanism used to select the cards, a rigged deal is often referred to as a rigged RNG.

What this thread is quite clearly not about is AP/UB type superusers, or alleged snapshot taking poker programs.

This particular 'tard has already been outed as a gimmick account and it looks as if it belongs to a particularly stupid serial troll.

Don't expect any sense from him.

Knowing first hand how wrong you are about this, gives me great confidence that you will continue to be wrong about most things. Go ahead and tell everyone who i was outed as.