Pretty much. The way I look at it though, there are probably a number of lurkers here who believe similar things, but don't post about it. Hopefully a few of them are more reasonable and are swayed by reasonable arguments.

*grunch*

I'm pretty sure Geddy Lee can play online if he wants to.

doh steal me thunder

HJ = yes this band is good but I'm kind of tired of them - very good drum lines tho

Rush kicks ass

And over a large enough sample-size, this will happen pretty regularly, but might be kinda hard to notice.

Something some people just don't seem to get about statistics is even the most improbable things happen occasionally. You could conceivably get AA 10x in a row your first day playing. Not 'cause it's rigged for new players, but because it's just random and can happen. It will even out in the long run.

true enough and I also remember an idea that if weird stuff did *not* happen over a given time period, that would indicate the events were actually further from random... can't remember what this is called.... anyway, yeah I've probably played > 1mil hands online... one time I was dealt QQ three times straight (ZOMG!!!) but really, in a truly random series, one should expect this to happen AT LEAST once and if it doesn't, that may actually *possibly* indicate a non-random series - but hey stats is rigged too so wtf you just can't win obv

I used to take screenshots when I got something like AK on 2 tables at once. Sometimes it would even be the same suits!

3 years later I very briefly consider it and rarely do take the picture. And I haven't played like 10% of the hands that MircoBob ( ) has.

OMG you guys are still entertaining this guy?! It couldnt be more obvious that this is some stupid joke that he gets off on. He must have learned the definition of LEVEL a couple days ago.

So sick of Leviln Keviln. Just analyze a few of his posts and you will see what he is doing.

i used to take screenshots of every single hand i won until i started multi tabling and ran out of hard drive space.

haha leviln wp

Yeah, you caught me BF, been lurking here for months since my last post, looking for a reasonable argument to be swayed by, following your advice (or was it Micro Bob's) to post less and read more (good advice though, whomever the source).

Trouble is, the same old arguments seem to always be hauled out in rebuttal: "We all have millions of hands of stats on file that show everything to be within statistical norms" or, my favorite: "go find your tin-foil hat, little girl".

Sorry, still unswayed from my original point, that being: If the poker sites RNGs were truly random, you would not all have "stats within the statistical norm" neither in the short, medium or long term. Though over time MOST players results and card distributions would cluster within a statistically significant % of the Mean Line on a graph, a small but also statistically significant number would fall in a steadily diminishing number above and below the Mean Line on the graph forming the distinctive shape of an Inverted Bell Curve.

In the aforementioned thread "Donkey on fire" of 02/20/08, Josem was kind enough to share a highly informative graph of player results from his research on the UB cheating scandal. While he claimed that it showed a Bell-shaped pattern that would have clinched the argument for the "cards are random" side, I myself discerned a Bell-shape only on the negative side of the Mean Line with an unfortunate few suffering losses up to 200-300BB per hour with the degree of losses corralating predictabley with %VPIP. Strangely however on the positive side of the Mean Line, rather than a corresponding Bell shape the results fell roughly along a straight line at the 100BB per hour line irrespective of %VPIP, seeming to indicate a possible non-random limit on winning "rushes" such as that suggested by the much-maligned OP.

I eagerly await a reasonable argument that will sway me from my heretical
position. Flame away!

lmao this thread is still going?

think we need to call the police to have op arested hes obv. mental

He might win more and he might lose more. But he would definitely win 3 times in a row more often.

Also live limit games give you the chance to go on a rush and make a relatively big score. Once you cash out a few times online big scores in limit are as scarce as novels in a keno lounge.

If you're in the black on a site, the next time you've won 2 in a row in a limit game with 8 people, trust me. you've got about as much chance of winning a big pot as Ralph Nader has winning in 2008.

I no longer believe that OP is serious. He must be taking the piss.

I'm about done with all this, I've said my piece. Any of you old timers out there who have played a lot of live poker, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

I could say a lot more, about a lot of different things but what's the use. Guard your bankroll guys, that's the most important thing in gambling. I'll go to my grave believing there is something funny about online poker. That's what playing seven years of steady live poker will do to anybody. But once again, to you young players, you can lose big time too in live games, you'll just win 3 in a row more often. Take care

pipermax:

Online poker is indeed rigged in such a way as to cause an asymmetry between the win rates of winners and losers. The way poker sites do this is to sneakily remove a small amount of money from each pot.

Photobucket seems to have nearly unlimited space, plus you can PM them to Kevlin.

And there's also the rake.

please please please keep depositing online, thanks.

Yes somehow people are able to run at 1BB/100 for a net of over $1 million and 50/100 limit over hundreds of thousands of hands. Don't have the graph of the person who did that here but I'm sure someone does.

So my crappy graph will have to suffice. This is almost all limit. Graph is somewhat skewed to dropping down in stakes:

YES I KNEW IT WAS RIGGED THERE YA GO !!!

Dealer: Game #17407033126: Genius28 wins pot ($800)
Dealer: Game #17407037199: Steve_Haris wins pot ($800)
Dealer: Game #17407041741: Genius28 wins pot ($800)
Dealer: Game #17407046109: Genius28 wins pot ($400)
Dealer: Game #17407049809: Genius28 wins pot ($800)
Dealer: Game #17407053714: Genius28 wins pot ($798)
Dealer: Game #17407059843: Genius28 wins pot ($2148)
Dealer: Game #17407070200: Genius28 wins pot ($400)
Dealer: Game #17407073799: Genius28 wins pot ($800)
Dealer: Game #17407078758: Genius28 wins pot ($400)

occasionally a poster like this has an open enough mind that they actually do get educated.

And the frequency of people like kevlin posting on here has gone WAY down even though 2+2 traffic is huge in 2008 compared to what it was in 2004 or 2005. We literally had a post like Kevlin's pretty much every day or every other day back then and we don't have nearly as many of them now.
So I do think the discussions of it like we have on here really have helped to educate the general population somewhat.

Some of the posters who stop participating in the discussion like kev seems to are reluctant to admit that they're wrong or to come back because they know everyone is laughing at them but when they silently creep away like that I have to think that SOME of those types really are letting some of the arguments get into their head and start to entertain the possibility that the people bringing up the counter-arguments really do seem to know what they are talking about.
For some people it might be a sort of gradual and reluctant process to change their opinion on something like this...or on anything for that matter.