or the site could forward you their audit report

oh wait...

Unless you have some insider info im unaware of, no one lives in the Soviet Union.

Not that the audit report reply wasn't serious, but in response to the idea of paying rake, you'd have to pay a damn large amount of it to get anything close to an adequate amount of data, and it would be pretty ludicrous to do so.

If you really wanted to collect hands that way, you'd be best off trying it at a play money table, and it would still take a really long time to be able to come to reasonable conclusions. And then you get some riggie screaming about the play money tables having a different RNG than the real money tables. It's always going to be something, so it's probably not worth the effort anyway.

They did but then someone launched a class action suit.

Maybe you are right about different RNG's . Who knows . But sometimes I do notice that when you play in lower limit ring games like .25/.50 on pokerstars then goto a 1/2 table the deal seems much faster and sound is a bit different also . maybe its just the graphics but does seem different to me . I am not saying much other than an observation I percieve .

Tk does seem to have a bunch of personalities ITT so class action may actually work.

To clarify, I don't believe for a second that there is a different process being used to deal any hand differently on any table. I'm just saying that there are a million crackpot arguments that people come up with to refute evidence, so be careful about wasting your time doing a certain amount of testing if that's all you're going to hear about.

I can't see it being possible for somebody to do more work than spade already has, and you still see people disregarding it, coming up with crazier and crazier theories just to get around the work that was already done. He could test in even more detail to address the theories they have, and undoubtedly once he showed that the distributions turned out normal with those theories, there would be yet another batch of theories.

Bottom line, there are two potential scenarios here.

1) When FTP and Stars got their sites off the ground, they were focused on providing a platform for people to play poker, and saw that they could generate a ton of profit in these online games through rake. It seemed like a good business decision, they came up with a simple and easy way to run the games using a fair deal. And then profit.

2) When FTP and Stars got their sites off the ground, they knew people would play poker but the rake wasn't enough. They employed a group of super smart computer science experts to brainstorm ideas on how to rig the RNG in an undetectable way (and of course ran many simulations on the effect on revenue, ensuring that the rig would bring in significantly more profit). They met this challenge, and have never looked back. To date, not even the most intelligent minds have cracked this shady plan, on either site!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

In Soviet Russia pictures PM lawyer.

This whole thread is one huge level.

I agree its one big level because there is no solution without knowing the equations used . The Rng does not even have to be considered if its reliable .
I guess I can say if only 2 of us were discussing this then it would be like Lauel & Hardy , 3 of us maybe the Stooges , 4 or 5 maybe Our Gang and beyond that like an Asylum .
But even then there may be " One Who Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest "

Have a nice day .

Oooooooh. So close. I'm sorry for quoting this but I'm so pleased that your/you're nearly there...

Could I have your lawyers contact details to forward onto the "shills" and poker sites?

Who are all these people and could you ask them to pass on "the truth" to you so that you can post it before you get banned?

Wow....
I really thought that even though you can be a jerk, you were a step above the hardcore paranoid conspiracy crowd in intellect and reasoning. If you actually got PMs that said the bolded part above, then I strongly suspect most of them were just ****ing with you and you just thought they were serious. Or the half dozen true nutcases on 2+2 (out of a half million) just sniffed out a kindred spirit, not sure which.

Everyone wants the truth and wants online poker to be a fair game, *especially* the regular 2+2'ers. There isn't one person I've ever seen on here that wants to suppress evidence of any wrongdoing in online poker, it's actually just the opposite.

I'm probably speaking to a brick wall here.

real deal poker is almost here you shrills should be out of work soon

I don't think you understand my theory that a random site would lose customers very fast.
Too many sharks would go on lucky runs and too many fish would go broke.
Poker economy = Deposits - Cashouts - Rake.
The only way poker sites can grow is if the deposits exceed the cashouts and rake combined, therefor they clearly want to limit the amount of cashouts and increase the amount of deposits.
If the cashouts are greater than the deposits, the poker economy shrinks, and the site makes less money.
Even if cashouts = deposits the rake will reduce the poker economy.
What I don't understand is how these sites managed to stay in business so long, while milking us for so much money in rake.
Are there really so few people cashing out and so many depositing?

Using your rationale, McDonalds would go out of business because people would eventually have to stop eating, due to it costing money. Do you bother to use real logic?

I guess the poker rooms in Vegas will go out of business too. I've never seen a fish rebuy in my life. The poker economy grows because PEOPLE ENJOY PLAYING POKER. It's really as simple as that. Some people go away, others reload endlessly. Take a guy who makes 100k a year and likes to donk around at NL50. He could go on and on and on. Give me a break.

I guess I'm just one of those lucky sharks and over 700k hands across 3 different sites, it's rigged in my favor. Lucky me!

Please see my post:

For reals...? The entire city of Vegas was built from one small casino 80 years ago.

Yep so far enough deposit

But correct is Deposit - Rake = winnings and they need alot rake for sponsored players, commercials but thts the way how new players deposit.

Sky is falling if Deposits go down = less commercials= less deposits

WTF are you talking about.
People need food to survive.
People do not need poker to survive.
And most people do not play poker to have fun.
They play because they think they can make money.
I doubt any grinders that have been playing for 3 years or more consider poker fun.
Sure it is exciting when you win, but that's because people are playing for the money.
Do you have fun when you have losing days, or when you play for weeks only to break even.
It's not like a pick-up game of basketball where you can lose and still have fun.
Since my post has been buried by desperate fools making no sense I will repost and hope to have some intelligent responses.

I don't think you understand my theory that a random site would lose customers very fast.
Too many sharks would go on lucky runs and too many fish would go broke.
Poker economy = Deposits - Cashouts - Rake.
The only way poker sites can grow is if the deposits exceed the cashouts and rake combined, therefor they clearly want to limit the amount of cashouts and increase the amount of deposits.
If the cashouts are greater than the deposits, the poker economy shrinks, and the site makes less money.
Even if cashouts = deposits the rake will reduce the poker economy.
What I don't understand is how these sites managed to stay in business so long, while milking us for so much money in rake.
Are there really so few people cashing out and so many depositing?

Why are you reposting this?

See my post #17629

People don't need McDonalds to survive. Their food is unhealthy and overpriced. They should just go to the grocery store instead. But oh wait, people LIKE eating quickly made unhealthy food because it tastes good. Hmmmmm.

And yes, most of what keeps the poker economy going are the people who LIKE to play poker. Not everybody is a grinder who needs to profit. Some people just like to gamble. The biggest losers on the site are the people who come online and just play every hand. It's basically impossible to win that way, but they just keep doing it. There are examples of people who have blown through tens of thousands at levels as low as NL100. By that point they have to know they're just gambling and aren't winning players. Yet they keep coming back. Why? Because it's FUN for them. Just like it's fun for people to play house games like craps, blackjack, roulette, or anything else. Casinos make a KILLING off of people like that.

You seriously have to be one of the most clueless and simple minded people in this entire thread.

And by the way, my response is an intelligent response. Your post, isn't.

the life of a shill lieing every day of your life to help sell the goods of a bs company. middle finger for all you shills out there

Using your rationale, McDonalds would go out of business because people would eventually have to stop eating, due to it costing money. Do you bother to use real logic?

I guess the poker rooms in Vegas will go out of business too. I've never seen a fish rebuy in my life. The poker economy grows because PEOPLE ENJOY PLAYING POKER. It's really as simple as that. Some people go away, others reload endlessly. Take a guy who makes 100k a year and likes to donk around at NL50. He could go on and on and on. Give me a break.

I guess I'm just one of those lucky sharks and over 700k hands across 3 different sites, it's rigged in my favor. Lucky me!

Yea but you dont have to eat mcdonalds, you could make your own food or go to burger king