A month ago I would have said it was impossible for this thread to go downhill ...

ever notice how people come and go and come and go, and its the same group of ten sticking up for online poker. More people think its rigged than people who think its legit. If it really was legit wouldnt more people try and stick up for it. I got friends with 200K profits telling me they are siding towards the rigged end lately. At the very least even the top players think something just isnt right. Maybe it isnt rigging or the RNG, but something is messed up, and most everyone knows it or at least acknowledges it as a possibility.

What I don't understand is why somebody didn't have two diamonds so they could make runner runner flush. It just doesn't make any sense.

Wait, what?

Here, let me quote something for you that I posted earlier:


They probably get sick of bashing their heads against the wall trying to debate with those who won't be dissuaded by lack of evidence and refuse to use logic or common sense. I know I do, which is why I only pop my head in here once in a while now.

That includes everyone in this thread, I think. It's just that we assign different probabilities to the possibility.

There used to be a small weekly tournament I played in. One week, we got to the bubble with me as the short stack (M < 2). UTG, I picked up AA and shoved. I was called by the chip leader who had AK. He rivered a straight and knocked me out.

The very next week, same tournament, again we're on the bubble and again I'm the short stack. This time I pick up AK, shove, and I'm called by the same guy who again is the chip leader. He turns over AA. It holds, and I'm gone on the bubble once again.

Rigged? I don't think so. It was live.

I don't really have a point here. I've just been waiting two years for a good spot to vent, and I finally decided I'm never going to get one.

If you went through that poll and took out all the tards who got banned and came back with a new account(or 2 or 3) and voted again and again( I see mumu and pik in there) I wonder what the true number would be? And that doesnt count the people who couldn't be bothered voting or even opening the thread knowing what kind of pinheads they would find in here.

ever other site Im on the rigged side far outweighs the legit side

This.

And don't forget those who voted yes for fun. I find it hard to imagine a riggie voting no as a joke, but can definitely imagine people voting yes for that reason. I'm pretty sure one of the mods that voted yes has confirmed he did this.

That doesn't speak well for those forums IMO.

links please

To me it looks like a small band of dedicated teachers dealing with wave after wave of overexcited schoolboys.

Stats really aren't your strong point, are they?

Why does it not surprise me that your friends' ideas are as asinine as yours?

Really?

I didn't know they had special sites for rigtards?

So, it appears that the riggies have been rigging the pole. How ironic.

Stars and Tilt could EASILY buy votes, and pay professional writers to post this thread day in and out.
These writers would be well paid and well trained. They would blend with the natural proponents of their cause, giving them strength and confidence of their cause.
They would even occasionally post for the rigged side, making sure their arguments were weak and easy to refute....Illogical, emotional, paranoid and unintelligent.

If they did monitor and attempt to manipulate this forum, they would probably site good players who cash out alot of money, and attempt to discredit anyone who questioned their validity.

They might even try to make posting on the side of 'rigged' a humiliating experience, and insult the intelligence of anyone did so.
They would imply that anyone who could side with 'rigged' is just a losing player.

They would bury valid, intelligent arguments beneath a slew of smears and inuendos. For every 'rigged' post, they would echo it with 50 'only a donkey could think it's rigged' posts....it would serve as their motto.

They would demand proof! Hand histories! Delineating graphs!
They would cite variance as the ONLY possible conclusion to mathematical anomalies.

For every time the 'regulation' was mentioned, the would make sure the term 'paranoid' followed in force.

They would only be willing to accept one logical solution, and label all others as illogical.


But then, they would have no motivation to do so, would they?

Yup, it's such a damn bummer when you want to have a nice shot at libeling someone and some total arsehole comes along and asks for evidence.

The nerve of these people!

There you are, playing poker badly and looking for someone to blame for your abysmal performance.

You try and pin it on a superbot but no one's buying that.

So you start listing your 'impossibly' bad beats and squealing to all and sundry that the sites are rigged and some good for nothing, interfering, tosser comes along and asks you where your evidence is.

Sheesh!

People like that should be beaten senseless.

Sorry.
You are right.
Logic isn't enough.

Let finish the argument right now, and stop with the emotional banter.


Prove online poker is legit.

LOL.

You some kind of commie, boy?

I know they did things a bit differently in the old USSR but I work on the old established principle of English law* that someone is innocent until proven guilty.

Seems like natural justice to me.

So, how about you prove that it isn't?



* And Hence, Australian, American, Canadian, etc, etc law.

I always get upset when I win when I know deep down I'm a bad player and just getting rigged river cards. It makes me feel so guilty to accept my ill gotten 200K.

Of course not. If they had evidence from the sites that they were rigged and knew the site was willing to pay them well to act as shills then they'd have no reason to post. They'd have everything they'd need to blackmail the sites into keeping them silent. They'd already know the sites are willing to shell out good money to try to hide it. They'd be on easy street.

Oh, good grief, another gimmick account.

At least this one has the courtesy to let us know why he has no sense through the preternatural medium of his gimmick account name.

I think some posts in here need merged, a lot of repeating nonsense from alot of people.

Uncovering the UB scandal seemed like a massive, collaborative effort, coupled with mistakes on UB's part.
Your typical $.5/$1 players have little chance of compiling that evidence, nor do they have the motive to do so. But a high volume of $.5/$1 games are spread.

The money is there, the possibility is there.
There is logic for and against both arguments.

Your argument is just as emotional, tilted even, as the guy who took 3 bad beats and screamed-bloody-murder-rigged-rigged.

To deny that there is possibly a logical path that can lead to consensus is unproductive. It seems counterproductive to not look at both sides of the debate. Why would you want to be counterproductive?

Sorry for being such a bloody arse-hole, I obviously am trying to blindly prove my point and am unwilling to calmly rationalize the situation.


Your mother wears army boots.

Good point!

Looking at senseless's lame attempt I got to thinking that the poker sites would probably prefer it if all the 'shills' gave up so the thread was just a never-ending continuum of ******ed posts along the lines of:

A: It's just so damn rigged.
B: Yes, it is.
C: Too true, bro.
D: I lost with KK last night.
B: That's nothing I lost with AA twice!
C: ZOMG rigged!!!
E: Ain't that the truth.
T: We need regulation.
A: Undoubtedly.
A: It's just so damn rigged.

rinse and repeat.

Those players don't need to compile the full evidence themselves. There are people here who would undertake both that and the analysis if there was any real indication of riggedness.

Josem, Spadebidder and myself have all undertaken general analyses on data other than our own.

You clearly have no concept of satire.

Reading comprehension not up to much, then?

It was the 'interfering tossers' who asked for evidence (aka 'the shills') that were awarded that particular epithet, not the riggies.

You mean prove the deal is not rigged. How about you prove this teapot is not orbiting the sun?




Oh, and do you still beat your wife too?