He's a muppet, and wrong as always.

Of course, but what banonlinepoker was doing is one of my least favorite internet troll moves ...

Troll: [Some vague assertion of fact]
Poster A: "Could you be more specific"
Troll: Over there (vague reference to TV stations/big web site)
Poster B: "That's a lot of TV/web site, could you be more specific"
Troll: "Won't be hard to find it, go to the website they probably have a schedule on what hearing will be when etc. It's not hard"
Poster B: I searched, I found nothing ....

The next post from Troll is either - "If you're so interested you should search more ... I cant be bothered" or ............. :crickets:

Ahhh the old "If you don't agree with us you must be wrong" propaganda. Unfortunately your wrong as usual. It is tomorrow

Click the link below and if you try real hard you will find it on TV tomorrow. I found the last hearing quite easily.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...h-july-835603/

OK. You are not as bad as the average internet troll. Thank you for that link. It would have been better if you had posted that first rather than a *hand wave* towards CSPAN. I'm not a regular CSPAN viewer, so I don't know the chances that this particular committee session will actually be covered on TV, but at least now we know the HR bill that you are talking about. (H.R. 2267, Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act; according to that link)

Action hands sometimes is the only way to move money from good players to bad players, so the money can generate rake longer.

The rule is: "Whenever you make the bad moves win more often than it should, you increase rake."

This simple rule can be extended: "Whenever you make a bad player stay in the game more often than he should, you increase rake"

So action hands can increase the rake if they sistematically favor the bad players.

I help you with something a 6 yr old could have figured out (the 24 hour news cycle) and you insult me? Thanks buddy. You want me to come over and make sure you find it ok too?

I was about ready to get on here and proclaim that I no longer believe that online poker is rigged and then...I played in two tournaments tonight and saw quads 6 times. One was dealt to me, one against me, two on the board all in a row from flop to turn resulting in chops and then two more at the same table while me and another player were joking about it.

This isn't the first time I have seen this in my small sample of hands this year. What am I supposed to think about all of this? Seriously? WTF???

Is it possible that the programming is just malfunctioning every once in a while as it is trying to reconcile randomness? Is it trying to do this across such a large sample of tables and players playing all at once that it just freaks out?

I am going to continue to keep an open mind and give the big sites the benefit of the doubt. But my resolve was again tested tonight across a very small sample of hands.

Ok, back to the Tournament Strategy Forums...

No, no, he is. He is constantly abrasive and confrontational. Not to mention he still hasn't figured out how to quote properly (which adds great irony to his comment about helping you with something a 6 year old could figure out) nor does he know the difference between "you're" and "your".

He is best to just be left to his own devices.

Is the experiment over?

Pity. It got off to such a good start.

Monteroy, quit being a hypocrite and leave Arouet alone. You "participate" in this thread just as much as he does. And you shouldn't beat up the people on your side. It ain't cool bro.


(*_*) | /.

FWIW, I agree with Arouet on the sticky, or something like it.

I know qpw was planning on producing something very similar.

My thought was to have a locked thread (sticky or otherwise) with responses to all the common riggie and rigtard complaints/assertions/suggestions. Then, whenever someone showed up on this thread with a sensible query or an outrageous assertion, someone could post a link to the specific part of the thread dealing with the particular part of the subject at hand.

This would:

a) Enlighten genuine players with some understandable concerns.
b) Prevent the thread becoming a 'rigtard's charter' by ensuring casual visitors could see how concerns could be assuaged.
c) Be a viable alternative to the rambling train crash that this thread has been for most of its life.

I get where he's coming from, though we have slightly different approaches. As has been mentioned, the benefits of an improved FAQ would not be for the hardheaded riggies, but for those who are concerned about the issue and want to know how to approach it.

The mere fact that online poker rooms know that a US Gaming Commission has unfettered access to their software code – and are not just testing a "sample" of the output – should do the trick, if there really is any skullduggery going on. It will reassure players that the games are 100% legit. What online poker player would argue with that?

And seeing Barry Greenstein supporting HR 2267 on the Poker Players Alliance website gives it the gold seal of approval. You won’t find a more stand-up guy in poker!

Its normal just like its normal to play a turbo SNG's and get AA 3 times KK 4 times and AK/AQ 6 times and 5 small Pocket Pairs in 67 hands. While I'll play a long deep freezout and won't get one of them the whole tourney for 3 hours.

but I'm sure that's just variance.

Really, though, Donko, if a site were to rig the deal they wouldn't be that obvious about it.

1) Anybody here read any Italian or French websites and can confirm that government licensing and regulation eliminates all riggy paranoia? (I'm pretty sure I already know the answer to this one).

2) Vegas has been cited not long ago in this thread as the model of regulation. And yet players still routinely blame the dealer for their misfortune. Why would more online regulation make any difference when it hasn't made any difference in Vegas? (You're the same as the live donks who throw cards at dealers).

Well, when you type Vegas into google, it isn't countless threads of people saying it is rigged. so maybe if there was US regulation at least some of the people would maybe feel at ease. not likely, but maybe.

I try not to think about it. you see weird things happen, and take crazy beats, but i just try and keep my head down, and load up another set of games.

Have you tried typing "Online Poker" into Google? Please let us all know what page the first "online poker is rigged thread/site" comes up on.

First page, under Wikipedia. if you have any more questions regarding the interwebz i'll be happy to help.

Now, why don't you type "Vegas" into google, and let us know the first thread that involves cheating.

You just answered a question that he didn't ask.

Standard rigtard level of comprehension.

When using the term "interwebz", it is correct to use a faux typo to spell the definitive article, as in "teh interwebz"

HTH HAND

Can you please point to the part where i said Online Poker is rigged?

This. Now go back and see what page of Google the first poker is rigged thread/site is on.

And for the record, if you type "Wiki + Shilltard" you pop up on the first page. that must be quite an honor.

And for the record, if you type "Goathair + Shilltard" you pop up on the first page. that must be quite an honor.