Just because posters like you try to derail the main topic of this thread by discussing regulation, hand farming sites like PTR, virus writers, etc. doesn't mean that everyone else should just go along with it.

Does the Nevada gaming commission guarantee 100% of poker games played in Nevada casinos will be free of cheaters? No. If a player is found cheating in the casino, does the NGC shut down the entire casino? No.

Why should the regulations of online casinos be any different?

No, You got it all wrong. It's like when Tom Dwan said:
BTW your screen name and TheRealAIBoomer arent in any way a reflection as to why you created that name?

If only there was a whole forum dedicated to Poker Legislation. Even better, there could be a whole forum dedicated to iMEGA and another for the PPA....oh wait.

If only, you and the other minions, would man up, come there and post...."debate," would be a better choice of words... hint, hint...

I'll meet you there.

You may be happy to continually try and stir up an off topic debate in a thread in a forum separate to that in which the debate belongs but most of the rest of us are not.

Why don't you 'man up' (whatever the hell that means) and start posting things about this debate where they belong?

Or do you not like the consensus of opinion where the subject is on-topic?

"I am Phoenix" I went ahead and FYP.

It's ok if I were you, I wouldn't want to get pwned by the PPA lawyers either...

If that's the case, then why did you respond to my "derailment?"

So you want me to indulge in a pointless and unprovable discussion?
-Not going to happen...

You're "proof" is open to interpretation. btw.

You completely misunderstand what people post, fail miserably at "correcting" them, say they got "pwned" when they clarify your confusion and insult people because you think they sound like they're using a thesaurus.

Proof please?

Now you're acting like a rigtard....

It's his sense of self importance that allows him to believe that anyone would bother to consult a thesaurus just to reply to his nonsense that I find most amusing.

That and headlining his illiteracy by making a fuss about fairly common words when a dictionary is only a couple of mouse clicks away.

Is this your latest technique?

Talking in complete non-sequiturs?

tk, I've clarified this so many times, generally to get ignored. The current line of discussion is just ridiculous.

Why is it you feel like the PPA and working to get regulation in this country is more about overseas regulators being inadequate than it is about our current laws being inadequate? Personally, I'm in favor of the USA reversing its prohibitionist stance and taking a more reasonable approach while at the same time supporting organizations who regulate the games currently because the USA provides us with no other alternative.

Generally speaking: PPA = good, Major poker sites and their regulators = good, current US policy = horrible. We can nitpick and find a thing or two here or there we don't like about the approach of either group, but some of us are open minded enough to not see everything as black and white. The PPA fighting for US regulation does not imply that outside regulation is inadequate. It's simply a result of our lawmakers leaving us high and dry thanks to a horribly misguided effort from the christian right who felt it was their responsibility to legislate morality for us. Is that the poker sites' fault? Hell no it isn't. Will US regulation significantly change the way poker sites are managed? Hell no it won't. It'll simply add another regulatory body on our shores that serve the same purpose as the ones overseas.

The PPA is way more about stopping efforts in this country to cut off online gaming and all of the wasted resources expended by the US government to freeze funds and make the players lives hell than it is about finding flaws in offshore regulation.

And honestly, tk, you're the one resorting to childish behavior at this point. University of Phoenix? Declaring your opposition in the debate pwned? Really?

No. This wasn't directed to me, but I must say that you are either being disingenuous or just very loose with words, to the point of them losing their meaning. The deal would be absolutely unchanged. You, on the other hand, would be cheating. That doesn't make the deal unfair in any way. It just makes you a cheater.

It's a moot point anyway because no one has ever done this at any site anywhere, not even the insiders at UB/AP. You could argue that it was possible at Planet Poker a long time ago, whether anyone ever did it or not. But that's kind of irrelevant nowadays.

I agree with your rationale and I'm not going to debate the definition of Rigged with everybody. I don't agree, but I have personal reasons as to why.
Therefore, as I've stated before, I wouldn't contest the definition and context of Rigged.

But, did you ever stop to ask yourself:

"WTF is this guy's(me) problem?"

tk, did u edit spade's post?

They can have however many HHs they want. There have not been 500 billion hands dealt on PokerStars - only 41billion or so.

Of those 41billion hands, the play money HHs are not kept.

The required sample size is entirely dependent on whatever you are testing.

For example, if you were testing the frequency of pocket aces being dealt to you, and you sampled 100 hands, and all were pocket aces, you'd have a strong case that something was amiss.

Millions of players is likely a exaggeration, but certainly there are thousands that do. We've had polls and debates before about how many people use trackers, and no one really knows for sure.

You continually mention these things like they are a given, as if we know there are hundreds of people out there doing such things. They aren't, and we don't.

And your last sentence is just ridiculous.

tk, you really should just stick to discussing the facts. You're not much of a writer, and there's nothing wrong with that, but calling other people out for their writing just makes you look silly.

Care to elaborate on this? Because on the surface, it sounds like unfounded paranoia. Are you concerned about people from outside the site getting your information? Or are you worried that someone at 2+2 is giving away everyone's information?

The original post and the quoted post are different, but the differences don't seem to be anything tk would've wanted to put in. I assume spade edited his post after tk quoted it.

lol, delusions of grandeur itt

ZOMG !!!! ... ONOZ !!!

Play Money is unaudited ... it must be rigged !!!!

[non-stupid reply/questions this time]

So the 40+ billion hands includes play money hands? If so how many real money hands have there been? (or is that non-public info?)

What about freerolls, either completely free, or FPP entry ... are they kept?

Maybe this isn't the thread, but I wonder what kind of computing power is used now for online poker sites to run the way they do VS what kind of power would be necessary to run it "the rigged way"? Is it even possible for poker sites to "favor" players in real time? I imagine that it's possible, but at what monetary cost? I'm sure we have some qualified peeps who could answer this.

Has this been discussed elsewhere?

QPW could probably answer it.

I'm a low volume player, and I will routinely lose 30+ consecutive heads-up races all-in preflop, where I'm no worse than a coin-flip in the vast majority. (And I have the dominating hand in many of them.)

That alone has me 100% convinced the online deal is not fair.

No. And the poker sites that stayed in the US and didn't leave the market like some others should be thanked.