Amazing that people still discuss a random deck or a rigged one.

So far i know there was now 12345 threads that people are screwed in other way than shuffling

People should enjoy poker as a hobby, beat the system or simple do other things.

Exactly. Just like the police can't prevent crime. But they sure can bust scumbags when they commit them, like they did with this fool.

I know a good chunk of you shilltards have a rough time stringing two or more related thoughts together – or believing that programmers rig software, as is shown in this and other videos - so I suppose I will do the humane thing and spell the rest of it out for you: Do you think any future Nevada-based online poker rooms will risk their online gaming licenses, when there is a proactive gaming commission who has had success going after software cheats keeping an eye on them? Not likely.

can you just run that sentence by me again?
i am having a rough time stringing my thoughts thereon

I don't think any current online poker rooms that are regulated by UK white-listed jurisdictions will risk their online gaming licenses either.

I wasn't referring to you.
I appreciate that you came up with the proper formula I was looking for. It's the automatic ridiculing that someone gets when they offer a question that, however remotely, can be construed as a "poker is rigged" statement. I have a relatively limited sample size and even then, no software at my disposal to analyze Hand histories, I was hoping someone would provide the data I was looking for using their own HH and eventually someone did.
Yeah, when I was using my faulty formua I did question the site, but it was based on that faulty assumption. At the same time, though I was looking for clarification and the assurance that it is not rigged.
Now, if I can locate my HH files on my computer (they should be there somewhere, as I remember telling the software to save them), what is the least expensive software I can get to use the HH to do an analysis?

Wiki from my view
science = theory-> trail error testing-> tures or false confirmation
riggies have many theory, and wants testing to confirm if it's trues or false
to me, that is science.
the non-riggist have theory about online poker rng is not rigged, but cannot provide any hard evidence, and refuse to have any testing done.
that is not science.
Monteroy, english is my fourth language.
i would appreciate if you don't speak lies about me.
ones who are dead serious about his beliefs does not need or want to comfirm the facts.
what's the 40% vpip theory?
where did i speak of this 40% vpip theory? enlighten me
i have my doubt about online, therefore i want to see some facts to remove my doubt.
what monteroy think is not a fact.
i found monteroy untrustworthy
1) i can find many statement made by monteroy in this thread, that mislead people to think HEM/PT3 can be use to check the data!
2) monteroy misleading people tho think spadit's work has proof it, when infacts, it's not done.
3) monteroy offer nothing but trash talk.

hey spadit
why is Turn and River Analysis lock?
can you pm me the password?

First off buddy, you're way out of line.

Lizard people would only see lizard people doctors.

There will never be a DNA test on a Reptilian Homonoid b/c the Nephilim are the ones that provided us with the technology to trace DNA and chromosones. (Hence the Medical symbol of a Snake wrapped around a pole)

The League of Nations and NATO would quickly dispose of all evidence. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Getting back on your topic of Annunaki, they are more than likely orbiting our planet in Mother ships, complete with full access to the internet as well as their own servers to host and run an online poker site. (The wireless security breach? Yep, Lizard people intercepting the signal from space.)

Their ships only enter Earth's atmosphere to withdraw their winnings from our banks. I believe you have to be with in .007 light years in order to physically teleport.(Hence, Agent 007 with "alien technology") This is why there have been so many UFO sightings in the past few years.

Also, the UFO over China? -Evacuation for the bot ring recently discovered.

N. Korea? -Harboring Nephilim for violating the Wire Act...

Don't Ask Don't Tell? -Smoke screen, Lizard people want to "come out of the closet." But exposing their business venture(Online poker particularly) will expose the Rigged RNG.

FOF(Crusaders against online poker)? -Very religious group, knows the truth about the Lizard People and their Online Poker Ventures. Since the Reptilians are online poker tycoons and protected by the Greada Treaty, which would violate United States National Security, in political and policy areas, FOF is legally bound to secrecy and unable to expose the true purpose of their mission.

The bolded section is inaccurate.

The non-rigged brigade think that on line poker is probably not rigged and do testing or are aware that many people do testing and no evidence for RNG/deal rigging has been discovered (although there was a problem with an RNG way back - not rigged but predictable).

A while back, someone used to post this aphorism:

Rigtards believe that online poker is definitely rigged despite there being not a shred of evidence that this is the case.

Those of us defending online poker believe that it is probably not rigged because there is not a shred of evidence that this is the case.

Tk, you should pursue your comedy writing talents. You show promise.

Edit: That's not sarcastic, by the way.

maybe there is something to be added in the middle between not rigged and rigtard.
someone like me
people that have doubt but don't have the neccessary means or enough understand of math to do anything about it.
people like me wants some software or someone to show that everything is in good standing.
stuff like there is no shred of evidence it's been rigged, it's so not satisfy.
specially we know you didn't even do any analysis, because if you do, we did see them by now.
to be fair, the only mass data been done by spaditbidder is not finish yet.

in my case, over 1/2 million hands, there were definely some statis that are way off. that create doubt in my mind, but i don't have the knowledge on math or the "know how" to know if it's my lack understanding of math, variance or something else.

There is a middle ground. These people are called 'riggies' which simply means they have concerns that have not yet been completely assuaged.

The term 'Rigtard' is reserved, by myself at least, for those who just ignore any attempt at explanation of why their theories are wrong and, rather than pointing out flaws in the explanation, resort to spurious allegations of people working for the sites - or other irrelevancies.

I have a new word "wikitard" someone who is so focused on his ideas being right that he is unable to accept any form of challenge to these ideas and will say and do anything to be accepted by other wikitards.

If you actually read what tk1133 wrote instead of succumbing to a kneejerk reaction it would be quite obvious that he was intending to be humourous and doing quite a good job of it.

I was just encouraging him in that.

What he wrote wasn't a challenge to anything.

That happened to me live, once. I used to play in a small weekly tournament in a local bar. The tournament paid three places, regardless of how many entrants there were. We usually had between 15 and 50 people playing. Fifteen dollar entry fee.

Anyway, we get to the bubble (four people left in the tournament) one night and I'm the short stack. I pick up AA and shove on the big stack's raise. He calls, shows AKo, and picks up a straight by the river. I'm gone.

Best part of the story is that the next week we're on the bubble again, and once more I'm the short stack, but this time I pick up AKo. Of course I shove. I get called by the same guy who beat me the week before. He gives me a sort of apologetic look and turns over AA. I kind of laugh and proceed to miss the board by a mile.

It's just one of those things. When it happens on line you think, "Okay, what the bloody hell is going on, here?" But this happened live, so I had a story to tell the next week at the tournament, with my nemesis (who I actually enjoyed playing with) filling in the blanks and trying to keep from laughing.

Just one of those things. Get past it or give up.

if you read what wiki writes on here,
you will see he/she presents a balanced, well-written attempt to inform people that, perhaps, they may care to re-evaluate their position on the issue of poker being rigged on-line,
yes, at times, it may be presented in a way that might be considered 'challenging',
but he is polite, informed and imho extremely obliging to take the time to post to so many exasperating, ill-reasoned and unreasonable people

signed

b a wikitard

ps i know this has been written about before, but i still find it strange.
just why would an on-line poker site use a rigged deck which would seriously jeopardise their license to print money? in what possible way would that help them?
yes, the odd software bod could jeopardise his career and reputation by offering up a warped, hard-to-detect dodgy programme, but the site has its own people to check that, as well as the independent analysis, let alone 2+2'ers who would soon highlight any anomaly
so, who is it that benefits from having this supposed rigged deck?

Ever hear of a site called AP? UB? They might not have rigged the deck, but they managed to surprise everyone who thought a profitable site would never do anything to jeopardize their income stream.

That happened to me live, once. I used to play in a small weekly tournament in a local bar. The tournament paid three places, regardless of how many entrants there were. We usually had between 15 and 50 people playing. Fifteen dollar entry fee.

Anyway, we get to the bubble (four people left in the tournament) one night and I'm the short stack. I pick up AA and shove on the big stack's raise. He calls, shows AKo, and picks up a straight by the river. I'm gone.

Best part of the story is that the next week we're on the bubble again, and once more I'm the short stack, but this time I pick up AKo. Of course I shove. I get called by the same guy who beat me the week before. He gives me a sort of apologetic look and turns over AA. I kind of laugh and proceed to miss the board by a mile.

It's just one of those things. When it happens on line you think, "Okay, what the bloody hell is going on, here?" But this happened live, so I had a story to tell the next week at the tournament, with my nemesis (who I actually enjoyed playing with) filling in the blanks and trying to keep from laughing.

For whatever reasons, it can be a lot harder to get past this sort of thing when it happens on line. You have to try, though.

We are all well aware of the antics of AP/UB.

However, this thread is about whether or not the deal is rigged, not cheating generally.

Superusers, collusion, robots, etc, belong in other threads. Everyone knows that all these things:

a) are possible
b) have been spotted
c) have been proven

What has never been proven is a site deliberately rigging the deal. This is despite their continually being under the watchful eyes of many hundreds of thousands of poker players many of whom have considerable programming and maths skills.

1. i think it's clear now 2+2'er who highlight any anomaly get call riggie or rigtard. it's very sample, they aren't going to have anything to show that can with stand sample size, variance, monteroy telling them the lizzard story, and why is it important we do not check for rigging.

2. there is no tool of any kind available to public regarding detecting anomaly.
i think spaditbidder write his own software.
also monteroy telling the lizzard story and say something like the anomaly is just things creat by the rigtards, and it's impossible to disproven them all, so we shouldn't bother.

3. you don't even need hard to detect dodgy programme
2+2'er doesn't even have the ability to validate legit rng dealing.

when you as the question why would poker site jeopardise their license to print money.
i like to ask you. would you do it if there 100% no risk at all.
independent analysis? when is last time ftp, stars, ipoker did one. where is the result?
i remember there is one thread about stars not been aduit for like 7 years.

My computer must be screwed up. The title of this thread on my computer would indicate it is generally about poker being(or not being) rigged. My response was to the part of his post about why a site might take those steps to cheat their customers and put their business at risk. I was merely pointing out the absurdity of his question in light of what has happened at AP/UB. I am sorry I haven't paid Wiki his royalties this month to be able to post in this thread.

Yes, and those who put the case that it's probably not rigged get called 'shills'. It may seem childish but, on the other hand, it's a quick and easy way to refer to the sides of the debate.

Au contraire. It is very important that people do check for rigging from time to time. No one has, to my knowledge ever discouraged anyone from doing that. It's just that the sort of people who have convinced themselves that on line poker is rigged rarely have the maths or programming skills to do such work on their own.

For two reasons:

1) The number of people who would buy it is extremely small.
2) There are so many weird and wonderful theories about how the deal could be rigged that it would be a full time job to provide such a tool and keep it up to date.

If I were to come here tomorrow and offer a tool that checked to ensure that everyone got their correct share of starting hands and that subsequent table cards cause people to hit the correct number of various types of hand, do you really believe it would silence the riggies?

Again, that is because there is an almost infinite number of ways one could suggest the deal is unfair.

Certainly we could provide software to show that each card turns up the correct number of times and the two test referred to above but it would be utterly pointless as the riggies would simply put forward ever more involved theories and complain that no one was testing for them.

For Pokerstars, quite recently.

See here.

Sorry to hear that. Not really relevant, though, is it?

Quite so.

Rigged.

Not about collusion, robots or other sorts of cheating.

Yes, and you notice the salient point? AP/UB GOT CAUGHT.

It should now be obvious to any poker site that they are under extreme scrutiny and it would be extremely foolish to try a stunt such as rigging the deal which would be rapidly noticed and brought to the attention of the general poker community.

Well, you don't seem to be having any trouble posting here.

You are, however, welcome to send me a cheque if it makes you feel better.

Dont forget that they catched the superuser only for one reason = ultragreedy.

And the bots = verry primitive

I have doubts that the deck is rigged, but i have also serious doubts that it is easy to detect them. Maybee it would be easier to improve profit to run a few housebots .

Poker could be random and still far away from a fair game.