That statement was not intended as an insult in any way and shouldn't be in the list of things you say offends you in responses. It is a well-known cliché that illustrates a logical fallacy which was present in your posts. But since you apparently don't recognize it, I wanted to make sure you know that I rarely resort to personal insults or cheap shots. It was not one. If I thought you deserved an insult from me, it would be piercingly clear.

Poker sites hate players that cashout. It is very bad for business.
Why is it so far fetched that they might alter a few cards to prevent cashouts when your account is growing.
There really does seem to be a limit in how much you can win at FTP before you get absolutely hammered by the RNG.

I wish poker had the regulations that energy companies do. As it stands, there is no reliable, legitimate regulation in place.

It might seem disingenuous "legalize for better regualtion", when apparently you don't feel regulation is nessecary.

More importantly, isn't disingenuous a weird word...it has a "u" then an "o" then a "u".

I am stupider for visiting this thread.

wrong, I've encountered no such limits... the winning is relatively continuous over time.... maybe it's just because I shill for them

That is a known side-effect. Don't get trapped in the rabbit hole like some of us. You should run away quickly.

False.

And by the way this statement is just laziness on your part. I doubt you know anything about the regulation that is in place. Hint: If your problem that the regulation comes from non American sources, you're going to have to do better than that. And don't use Kahnawake as an example either because I'm sure most of us are in agreement they're a joke.

Specifically, what are your issues with the Isle of Man, Alderney, etc. Do you even have any idea what is going on or are you just spouting nonsense off the top of your head?

I feel morally obliged to stay at this point...plus I'm winning!!!
Stupid, but lucky, thread.

Well another thing I've observed on a particular site is a strange phenomenon known as GOOD LUCK at low levels, and BAD LUCK at higher levels.

Case in point... I moved up to $50 SNG during a stretch where I had a big bankroll. I encountered some of the most nightmarish suckouts ever, including runner runner straights and boats, and I lost 20 SNG in a row and not one of my good hands held up.

I moved down to the $3 SNG and immediately my luck changed, I started winning again...

After building my BR back up, I re-entered the $50 SNG and against lost about 10 in a row, with horrendous suckouts that made my head spin..

Moved down to $3 SNG and immediately things turned around..

Again, not making accusations, just food for thought..

Food for thought: Players are better at higher stakes. And yeah you're kind of making accusations.

And again, the cherrypicking and anecdotal crap has to stop. If it's that serious where it's making your head spin, it's time you started digging into the real stats and stop relying on your perception. Your "food for thought" gets us nowhere. An actual analysis with MATH behind it, DOES.

1. Im not even mentioning the name of the sites I play on, because I do strongly believe in the "innocent till proven guilty" idea.

2. Im not making accusations, I'm throwing out my experiences into the arena and seeing if other people can confirm or provide data to support this or not.

3. The players werent better at these higher levels, if you read my post you'll see that I had horrible bad beats in these games. In one I had KK on the bubble, got called ALL IN on the flop by a guy who didnt even have a pair and he hit runner runner 2 pair

Jesus man, without the ability to share data and anecdotal evidence, we can't even discuss the freakin topic..

Please dont turn this into a dictatorship with no free speech, like Siberia or Nazi Germany!!!

It takes about 5 minutes of reading this thread to figure out:
1) There are shills in this thread. Many of them.
2) There is no proof, nor does anyone seem motivated enough to find it.
3) That guy who called me an idiot is an idiot.

It takes over 2 hours to figure out:
1) Disingenuous is a funny word
2) The shills win

Are you kidding me? Anecdotal evidence? That's an oxymoron.

You can say what you want but thus far, you're trolling. I don't care about the one cherrypicked hand where you got KK and were sucked out on. No single hand has a probability of win or loss that should blow us away. I mean do you just not want the answers? I don't know, if I suspected something funny might be going on, I'd probably want to get to the bottom of it. Not drive myself crazy wondering.

Why do you ask others to provide data to support your theories and perceptions when you can't even come up with data yourself? How are you ever going to get anywhere?

Ask me as many questions as you want to get comfortable with the fact that I'm not a shill. I, and many others, have been pretty transparent. Poker players who have been playing a long time and earning honest profit at the games based on hard work and skill get really sick of idiots spewing nonsense and discrediting what is an honest game. It's really as simple as that.

And if you think spadebidder didn't have motivation to find answers when he did his billion hand study, you really are an idiot. Or Josem who did the statistical work to expose the superusers. You really think these guys are just going to look the other way if they find something wrong with the deal? Pretty disingenuous.

But the way you've framed things, people can only post on this thread if they've done some conclusion study involving scientific data backed up by a national study by the Pentagon or something..

Lets face it, none of us are rocket scientists here...

All I've said in these posts are some of the bizarre and strange phenomenons Ive witnessed online..

I wouldn't mention them if I saw the same thing in live games, but I never have..

Your point is taken, what Im doing is not furthering enlightenment on this topic, just adding my 2 cents..

1) Shut up
2) You are just mad because you suck at poker
3) Shut up.
4) If you can't present 5000 hand histories while remaining anonymous, you have no valid point
5) Shut up
6) Nuh- uh

And if I'm not wrong, no one has flamed you. Who gets flamed are the people who come in here with no evidence and strong, intractable, statements that the sites are rigged. There's nothing wrong with asking questions, all players should. But making baseless accusations is not ok.

You don't even have to be a rocket scientist. I mean if you'd just follow a basic suggestion like actually documenting the hands and easily calculated odds and not just the ones you were sucked out against, you really can get some answers for yourself.

I mean fine, if you want to just continue to contribute nothing of substance, feel free I suppose. But it's just a bunch of useless noise and the responses are going to end up being similar as there's nothing to comment on.

And I have seen the same thing in the live games. Anybody who has played a decent amount of live poker has and if they say otherwise they're lying to themselves. Also, how many $3 sit n gos can be played live? I'd imagine you're seeing a lot more hands online amongst people who are getting it all in in ridiculous spots especially in the turbos where the action is forced.

Well he called me a troll, which hurt my feelings

I am didn't mean to imply every "legit" is a shill, I am sure it is a small %. I respect anyone who stays above the fray....I know I gave up!

I can't debate highly intelligent/informed people, a buncha crazy ranters and 5 shills making it hard to distinguish. Sorry if you felt I lumped you all together, I mean no offense to the former.

I'm finishing up a new one that will be published soon, looking at several hundred thousand preflop all-in hands, probably over a million in all (just the all-ins). I'm working on summarizing them into the 169 hand types with equity vs result for every hand when it gets all-in preflop. It took me a while to figure out the best way to do the all-in results with this many hands. I decided that the way I've shown in some samples already wasn't the best way to do it.

I just dont see situations in live games where 4-5 players gets dealt a strong hand which hits the flop in a 9 handed game.

The example I gave last night where 2 players had sets, one had AK, and one guy hit a runner runner straight.. NEVER seen that in real life.

And the weird thing is, I see this EVERY SINGLE DAY when I play online...

Just now I shoved JTs in a live 9 handed game when short stacked, got called by AK, 99, QQ, JJ...

The flop was 9JK..

I just dont see these things in a real live game EVER...

When you see things in online play over and over that you never see in live games, you do start to wonder...

Eventually, these things will demoralize you and cause you to either withdraw the money or get depressed..

Heh, well that's what you get for posting bad-beat stories. But you seem pretty up front at not having formed an opinion and are looking for more information. That is entirely fair and admirable. You are asking questions and you will find there is a lot of good advice to be found from the regs in this thread.

As has been pointed out many times, while there are a handful of regs in this thread, take a look at the responses from the general zoo community in rigged threads pre-merge. The flaming is usually worse, and the great majority of posters make it clear they feel the riggies are just paranoid. Most 2+2rs just don't want to spend much time in this thread.

Don't take my word for it, skim the thread for posts with different titles, you'll see what I mean.

You probably have seen it live, you just didn't pay as much attention. Also, how many hands have you played live compared to how many hands you've played online?

So you think the massive volume of hands makes it more likely you will see all sorts of crazy deals and situations online?

I guess so, its possible... but last night I saw a whole bunch of those within a VERY small time frame, check out my posts from last night..

I think one day the truth about online poker will be revealed.. I think the truth will contain the following elements:

1. Most sites have legit shuffles
2. A few sites had rigged shuffles
3. Most sites had house players of some kind
4. A few sites had insider cheating like Pot-tripper

Something like that, a mix of fair and legit with some corruption..

You must acknowledge the possibility of this..

I dont know what is going on with online poker but something is messed up. Whther it be superusers, the RNG, predictability of the RNG, bots, mass MAers, or mass datamining something is up.