Quote:
Originally Posted by quarantined
I honestly understand lego, and actually i completely concur, it's just the calling people ****** thing, I don't know,just such an ugly word. the thing that continues to baffle me, is why so many of you, who obviously have real lives, continue to let the more obvious riggomaniacs get to you,wouldn't silence work more effectively? although, that would deprive people like me of their lurking entertainment. anyway, I did say I wouldn't post on this thread again,but I wanted to reply to you,as you are another,like arouet,fuego,spade and obviously many others who deal very patiently with these people, and deserve some kind of accolade. anyway take care, hope to see you around on another thread down the line
I agree that name calling and ad hominem attacks do little other than to fuel emotions and inevitably leads to 10 posts discussing the name calling. There is plenty of room for jabs in these threads but I wish people would at least TRY to be creative. Much better to use wit than lame insults - this includes just throwing out "shill" every post.
However: that's what people don't get: many people, myself included, enjoy the challenge of trying to get through to people who are not using logic properly. The ability to craft proper arguments is incredibly useful and participating in these types of discussions can keep one's argument skills fresh - or not. Others ITT derive a substantial portion of their income from online poker and don't like to see the potential fish be chased away by threads like this. You don't need to go to "shills" to find people willing to continue to reply to these people. I do it less now, and try to ignore the pure trolls (like BS), but still derive satisfaction when I do. You are correct that the poker sites would no doubt love for the non-riggies to stop posting in this thread entirely and hope that it dies out. Which is why the accusation of "shill" is so laughable. Many people (such as myself) are in front of a computer all day long, so checking on our subscribed 2+2 threads are a welcome distraction from work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snipa
Oh another thing........ if you do play remember this amazing tip.
Less outs means you have a higher chance of winning.
No im not joking or taking the piss, its the mathmatics involved on pokerstars.
If you have the choice of a flush with 2 overs or a gutshot take the gutshot you will river it.
Also if you get in with AK vs QK, QK wins most of the time.
Its the mathmatics involved with pokerstars, less outs = more to give the fish a better chance of winning.
I got all in a couple times last night and lost 5 BI's in a row to almost the same hand.
It was A8s vs J9 board came A107 with 2 spades and he rivered a 8.
Then i get all in with QQ vs 99... A36 all diamonds i have Qd he doesnt have a d rivers the 9 that isnt a diamond.
After that i get all in with AQc on 10K7 K10c he has K9 and it goes xx.
Less outs = better chance of winning.
Remember that golden rule for beating poker on pokerstars i mean action rigstars.
Sounds like you have this all figured out. So why not take advantage? When you only have 3 outs, time to jam the pot = profit! Why complain when you have a surefire way of milking the system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beaten Senseless
They are very hard to pick out.
That is what the paid employees of poker sites do, make the real progression of thought in this thread impossible to follow.
They aren't that hard to pick out. The choice is yours, of course. If you want to see some very detailed arguments then skim the thread. If you don't, then don't. But don't think that just because posters like Spadebidder, Josem, QPW, Pyromantha, and others are not posting detailed responses to you are tacit acknowledgement that your allegations are correct. They have just gotten tired of posting the same arguments over and over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicrun
i will ignore you the same, along with wiki. then this thread can get back on topic, congrats wiki you dodged every logical question put infront of you. welcome to ignore.
This is the only logical response to a poster who you can't stand. Ignore them.
Oh, meant to flag one more: its been mentioned before but saying: can you prove online poker is NOT rigged, or can you prove there aren't 50% bots out there is a logical fallacy. It's like saying, prove to me you haven't cheated on your spouse: impossible to do. Best we can do is look at what evidence IS out there. Anything else is paranoia.
Finally, before going into another rant on the state of regulation can anyone explain the relevance to this thread other than perhaps saying that if regulations aren't tight, then it might be easier for sites to rig? This still says NOTHING about whether the sites are actually rigged. This is a big red herring for this thread. That is not to say that its not a legit topic, but there is a whole forum dedicated to that topic: why not bring the discussion there, where it belongs? Talk about trying to bury the thread!