Look at what youre saying. You are out of your mind.

wtf, no.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...ostcount=19259

The difference between this and poker is that in your example the side effect is unwanted and asymptomatic.

This is a very real problem when developing drugs.

In the 'poker is rigged' scenario the only reason to rig the deal is to cause some noticeable effect; 'action hands' being one effect that seems popular.

If you rig the deal for more action hands then, if you are successful, there will be more action hands and this will show up in any analysis of a suitable sample size.

For about the hundredth time:

If the site were to be manipulating the deal they would be doing it to achieve some end. e.g. more action hands. If they are successful then there will be more action hands and you will be able to test for this.

The 'tards' in their desperation to circumvent logic and the available evidence keep coming up with airy fairy notions of rigging that you can't see for one reason or another.

But if you can't see it, what's the point of doing it?

This is utter nonsense.

Your analogy sucks toltec444. Here's why. You talk about how the distribution of cards can be manipulated in a way that can't be tested, but you fail to mention that the output [the cards delivered to each player] can be tested. That's why the sites use RNG's in the first place. To distribute a random deal that won't distribute any patterns. Those patterns would show up in the math of the output. It's that simple. So, if there's manipulation going on you should be able to find it. Regardless of where it originates or takes place.. it should be there. A pattern of some sort. Show proof of a pattern outside of the norm of poker and you've got yourself some proof. Evidence of what you're claiming.

Or are you just predicting that what you're claiming now is just so undetectable that it just hasn't been "figured out" yet. But you're predicting it will??


** It's like your boss is promising you a paycheck of $1500.00. He used some of your money to buy his wife a new dress and shoes. He made a college basketball bet with your money, too. But, at the end of the week he still gives you the $1500.00 he promised. You shouldn't bitch or worry that "something's going on" with your money as long as you get the amount you were supposed to.. the $1500.00. Now if you only get $1300.00, then YOU KNOW something's "going on".

So to make it even simpler, where is some proof that you're not getting dealt what you're supposed to be getting dealt? It's rigged, but you can't show that "you only got $1300"? That doesn't make sense, does it?

Who hates you enough to take their time to do this to make you lose?

And the site dislikes you enough to sit around and do such subtle things to make you bust out of tournaments without upsetting the win % of hands why?

Josem works for PokerStars.

Howard owns Full Tilt.

It's not possible to prove a negative of this nature. There is no way to prove sites are NOT doing that. The way logical arguments work is you prove the positive. Prove that they are doing it.


Keep track of all the times you are all-in and could be eliminated with AA and see if the percentages for win/lose are correct or not.

Well actually I guess by doing that you could gather some evidence showing the negative or it could be phrased gathering evidence disproving the positive.

Why did you call a shove with 76 here?

Oh and getting 3 good hands and no action doesn't prove anything. It's just 3 hands. And tournaments generally play somewhat tighter (than cash games) due to smaller stack sizes.

I withdrew money a week ago and since then I'm up about $1200.

Maybe it's rigged for some people to lose when they withdraw and win when they deposit and for other people to win when they withdraw and lose when they deposit?

achieve some end, yes. But if you test for e.g. more action hands, and they only rig it that way randomly, for 2 hours a month, it won't be detected. For another two hours a month, you could randomly e.g. dump funds into dummy accounts starting with the letter P, then for another two hours you could randomly e.g. slow down the progress of anyone nearing super-nova status.

There are too many ways it could be done, and you have to assume it would be done intelligently, unpredictably and, therefore, untraceably.
So, assuming there is no predictable alogarithm, your point is less than moot, as is spadebidders mockery of "proof".

This **** is getting old. Put up or shut up IMO. We all know Josem works for Poker Stars (and I doubt he's paid to post here, but that's another matter); what else have you got?

I'm certainly not paid to post here on this sort of stuff - you could probably track my working hours by the gaps in my posting

I've got an idea for a thread where only "rigtards" are allowed to attempt to prove online poker is rigged. Anyone entering the thread without a clear aim to prove that online poker is rigged will be warned, then suspended if a repeat offender.

I tried, but I think 2+2 won't allow it. It got moved here, into "put up or SHUT UP where is your hand history you rigtard" land.

Another thread just for "legits" is fine, but I want to moderate both threads.

I'll take your lack of evidence and/or names as a retraction of your shill accusation. Thanks.

So wait...you want a thread where only one group of people are allowed to post, and anyone who tries to take a different viewpoint is banned? LOL.

It would get more progress. But I really said it to prove a point.

As long as there are people in this thread who go through a great deal of effort to stagnate progress, I will assume it is a paid shill.

I think if you were to read the whole thread, you'd find most of the people who appear at times to be "go[ing] through a great deal of effort to stagnate progress" have actually often made very solid points and contributed a great deal to the conversation, but get sick and tired of having the same arguments again and again with people who refuse to engage in a logical discussion. I'm thinking of posters much like qpw and NFuego20.

But if it makes you happy to make false assumptions based on little or no evidence, hey, you're in the right thread!

Go start your own forum then, imo.

For there to be progress, there needs to be a logical argument.

anyone..........

I'm not going to go through the 3 individual hands.

He ran below slightly below expectation for 50k hands, something that isn't unheard of nor impossible.

He is also a ****** if he feels something is wrong with FTP and he is still playing there but "move down in stakes". If you don't trust the site, move on to where you do feel your money is safe and you aren't questioning their integrity.

So, if I think a thread attempting to prove online poker is rigged is a good idea, then I should go start my own forum?

I think this is the ONLY thread where "shills" are allowed(not moderated). The rest of the forum seems moderated to allow for the freeflow of ideas.

I think if I went into an Omaha8/b thread, and repeatedly stated that NLHE is a better game and required more skill, even offered up stats. and hand histories as 'proof', eventually moderators would warn me to go to another thread and suspend me if I didn't allow threads to flower.

hahahahaha, POTY

No!
All groups of people are allowed to post!
Different viewpoints ARE welcome.
It's the repeated attempts, by the same individuals, to hijack a thread that shouldn't be allowed.

But that's not what you proposed. You suggested a thread where anyone not of a like mind wouldn't be allowed to post. Sorry, not in this forum.

Have you ever reported a post in this thread?

And if you haven't noticed, the silliness pretty much goes both ways.