Buy 2+2.

That's about the only way you're going to get one.

Green would be sweet. Or pink.

<--- feel free to add an under title (like "Stoned grinder"). That would be sweet, too

He did do very well. I saw only one misstep (colored in the quote) in an otherwise mature and rational argument.

Damn close, though.

Post a sample piece of pseudo-code that would do this. Or just a generally described algorithm.

I did wonder about the bit you highlighted as I didn't intend it to mean that people who have concerns about rigging don't matter. By 'that matter' I meant those responsible for game integrity at the sites and those responsible for framing and implementing the regulation regime - i.e. those who could have a direct effect on the way sites are monitored internally or externally.

That'll teach me to be lazy and not say what I mean accurately.

Sometimes that's true. Sometimes it isn't. More than once I've seen a newcomer to this thread attacked, sometimes in a personal and vicious manner.

This is a huge thread. A lot has happened in here. Some of it has been ugly.

The hope would be that it would teach you not to be lazy.

This is true.

It is particularly likely to happen when there has been a burst of activity from a particularly stupid rigtard who is then banned and the same day a newly registered poster jumps straight into the thread with a suspiciously large amount of knowledge about what has been before.

Usually these are just what they appear but people really should be given the benefit of the doubt in the first instance. I remember QPW laying into one such poster whose reaction and subsequent posting style seemed to distance him from any of the typical rigtards. I think he had a very legitimate cause to complain.

Yes, I've often wondered about that particular idiom.

It's similar to the 'could care less' syndrome where you say the exact opposite of what you actually mean.

It has happened more than once, no doubt. I imagine every regular participant could benefit from an occasional break from this thread, but that's pretty hard to do. It's like a drug.

The one poster I've noticed who never seems to lose his cool is Arouet, whom I hereby nominate for the Mature Poster of the Year award in this particularly frustrating thread.

I'm no clearer on the issue after having read this:

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langu...es/005297.html

But I thought the joke was cute:

At first I thought it was in that they are both completely wrong. However, having checked out that link, I'm not so sure anymore that "That'll teach you to" is incorrect. Whereas "could care less" is clearly wrong IMO.

We need a "That'll teach you to" continuum pic in here.

Hmm, quite a lot on that page but no definite conclusions.

I wonder if it may have evolved from, for example:

"I'll teach you; to throw stones has undesirable consequences"

and people started using the expression less formally and dropped the ending.

Or, the other possibility, of course: English is rigged.

So wouldn't it be "The hope would be that it would teach you to not be lazy" ?

Not to be or to not be -- that is the question.

lol

An interesting discussion. I play online poker for 1 year and try fix it respected the game. I play just freerools and not investing money in the account. All my games are in HM, we can say to what conclusion I came.

1. PokerStars: Who gets in most cases all, and when it comes to the larger amount of chips? Maniac or call station that plays the game even irrational and pointless, but the river it in 85% of cases falls just right, the only possible winning card. Hop hop, I look at PokerProLabs, PokerTableRatings or SharkScope and still look the same coincidence. Always it is a player who has lost a lot of money, which means that it requires constant cash on account. That it is therefore consolation prize. If you already wasting their money on Cash Games in our house,at least there a cure for their complexes with a bad game and winning.

2. Full Tilt: Never Play All IN against a player from the USA or Canada. Definitely you will be lost unless the game very little chips.

Does not hurt me too, because I do not play for money, but it seems to me a very incorrect and ugly, as they spend the time to bother me overcome the sheep that had that opportunity system, which owns an online house.

Alternatively, that I am indeed one exception, and it is my happiness, sometimes even below the average for a good hand so that I can not compete with the same amateurs like myself.
I would also be a professional, if it ever fell on the table cards that are better than the opponent.

My conclusion is this: money paid into the account and luck will be on your side.
If not, you say good-bye happiness

I see.

.

Hey everyone!!

I don't really have alot of time to post here, but i figured I would say a few thing. PLEASE don't ignore me. Oh (l)please (o)please (l)please...

I think this thread is mired by paid employees from poker sites. Their job is to make sure nothing from this thread goes very far. To bury posts their employers might not want to be read by many. To refute any questions about the validity of online poker.

Also, I think regulations for online poker are inadequate.

Whether on not poker is rigged, I assume it's not. I think it is a fair question worth asking, though. Anyone who has their mind closed either way is, obviously, a complete moron(AKA 'qpw'- the technical term for a close minded fool who shouldn't be here).

A clear way to prove it's rigged has yet to be elicited, and communication through this thread is a great way to gather information for either argument. I hope this is truly being done....I imagine we all do....why wouldn't we?

Good luck with your quest for the truth, maybe I'll stop back in a few hours/days/weeks.

Nobody who has a good idea for rigging is going to post it here, but BeatenS is probably closer to the truth (that it would be pretty easy). Personally, I know exactly how I'd do it, but the antiriggies say it would be detectable.

In other words, I know exactly how I'd try to do it but can't be sure it's undetectable.

I know exactly how to detect how you would do it.

Prove Im wrong! You can't!

Ya know bs-everything you just said you have said before-more then once. It has been addressed and answered more then once. If anyone is closed minded here it is someone like you who refuses to listen to any logical arguments against your position or attempt to offer anything new.

Your pathetic accusations and conspiracies are getting really boring. If you think it's rigged please post how, as requested. If you want regulation, please post in the regulation thread. if you want to annoy people and make a fool of yourself please carry on as you are.

So now the riggies have theories which they don't fully understand but choose not to post them to avoid them being explained thus shattering their little fantasy land. I now see what certian rigtards mean when they say "shills" are "stopping" the discussion.

Shut up you paid defender.

You work for the sites. I can tell. I will now bury your post by posting myself, because that's what we do on forums.

I don't understand the energy of the attacks on riggies. It doesn't make sense.

However, I can explain why I don't bother to fully develop my ideas and post them here: there's no reward to it. I don't want to rig a site and don't have a fully prepared program that anybody would be interested in buying.

I've been following this thread for a few months and didn't come here convinced online poker is rigged. If it is, it's still possible to beat it because a lot of players do.