Josem changes his avatar more often than McSeafield changes his underwear.

the funny thing about this is neither the german nor the english version make any sense

LOL at this coming from you. Really big LOL, after you quoted me and changed the quote without mentioning it, and then requoted me later on without attribution in a way that made no sense.

You are absolutely correct; not sure how I missed that. My apologies.

See how that works? You should try it some time.

Please explain how my thinking that the output is most important is flawed. Keep in my mind that my comment about output had nothing to do with that other thread.

RealDealPoker.com is Launching May 7, 2010.

Spamtastic!! Thanks for that detrimental piece of info. When will you be able to tell us how your system works?

The Russians use 4625 kHz (AM full carrier). Watch out.

Not quite, but close:

I don't really know what you mean by this. I don't think there was much luck involved at all - various players had their suspicions, they provided data, I converted that data into a pretty picture, and that was that. I didn't do any particularly "smart" analysis, I didn't do anything special: I just translated from numbers into pictures.

Subsequently, the hand history sent to Crazy Marco became public, but even that wasn't much in the way of 'luck' - that's how Absolute Poker had distributed their tournament hand histories in the past.

Even if uncovering that situation was all luck, that really doesn't have anything to do with what I thought was a fairly self-evident technique of ensuring that whatever site you play on is legitimate.

Those points are, again:

1) A comprehensive explanation of how the deck is shuffled (ie, detailing the process)

2) Accessibility to the hand histories (ie, the outcome)

3) Credible auditing

4) Credible regulation

Those four attributes are how you determine whether the shuffling on any online poker site is legitimate. That's simply how you do it. I really don't think that the four factors are particularly onerous or controversial, and I'm not sure anyone would disagree with these four factors - I assume you agree with me on this point (if you do disagree, tell me what you would change).

Sure, and that's fine. You're entirely welcome to say that the world's leading software gaming auditor isn't valuable to you. I guess that's a bit weird, but if that's your view, then so be it.

Of course, I really just think that you're being deliberately obtuse about audits, because you previously said:
Well, I say back to you, McSeafield: "Any poker site can be the subject to an fast independent and cheap audit. What the hell do you want more?"


I think it's really weird that people promoting certain online poker sites come into these discussions, make false and sweeping statements based upon ignorance, and then blindly assert an alternative as being the solution to the problem - without either identifying the problem, or explaining why the solution addresses the problem.

Literally everyone who has ever analysed the Intel or ID Quantique random number generators has confirmed that they're legitimate. AFAIK, no rigtard has ever claimed that the underlying RNG devices are biased in anyway - it would not even make any sense to argue that there are more 1s or more 0s coming out of the devices. The rigtards have claimed that for whatever reason, the RNGs get ignored or overruled in certain hands to favour particular players. I obviously disagree with that view, but that's certainly a fair statement of their views.

If rigtards have such a belief, then changing the underlying random number generator from a quantum-based device into a mechanical device doesn't even relate to the problem that the rigtards claim to be concerned about. The whole discussion is based on the faulty thinking that changing what generates the random data addresses their concerns. It doesn't.

You're posting in here under an SN that includes your site name, something that is generally reserved for approved advertisers. And now you skip a bunch of legitimate questions and respond to a post that allows you to spam your site and tell us when you open. You're probably not going to last long at this rate.

Good, if he's not going to answer Real questions, how will he get me a Real Deal? Honestly Gene, all of this is terribly old and it's now to the point where I am starting to hope you fail. Go look at some Real poker sites threads. Where there is a real representative answering Real questions with Real answers. Your thread blows and you have sent in shill type idiots that make your product look comical. But wait, you spent a lot of money and 5 years!!! How is it? Pissing into the wind?

I wish to learn about McSea's degree in statistics. And I absolutely HAVE to get more details about his long roulette experience and whatever studies he has done on this game.

Did he elaborate on this roulette stuff previously in the thread? I've only read the last 60 posts or so. Has he done studies of the game and roulette "patterns" and so forth? If so, then that would be awesome and I would like to learn every single detail about this.

McSea - I had a friend named Jerry who was a roulette dealer for many years who was also really good at some fun math. You could give him two numbers of 4 digits and he could multiply them in his head and give you the answer in like two seconds. It was really awesome.

Anyway, in all his time dealing roulette he had noticed several patterns about the game. One of those which I remember was that the ball landing in 12 or 21 was very frequently closely followed by the ball landing in 21 or 12 (the inverse). Sure enough, while he was telling me about this the ball had landed in a 21 and then on the next spin it landed just one or two numbers off from the 12. Really close call. I found it to be terrifically exciting. Have you made a similar observation about these particular numbers? Please explain. I wish to learn more. My friend Jerry wasn't able to give me any more info about why this was.

(note to everyone - the above is a true story...my friend's name really was Jerry and he really could do the multiplying thing in his head like that)

Usually i just ignore McSeafield and i guess most people in german 2+2 do the same. But because he is kind of new to you guys, I'm jumping in, to clear some of the confusion.


Yes, you never even played (online) poker, if that statement from you is correct.


No, please dont speak only in your 1st language, because your german posts are longer and even worse than your english posts.



Wont happen, but you guys have noticed that as well.


No, you are so wrong Bobo. Reading him in his native language and speaking the same native language doesnt help in any way. One of the problems is that he ignores arguments, which often leads to the impression and expression that he is living in his in own world.

I just opened for u a new G2+2 BBV Thread

whistle-blower CBukowski in action

Explanation: McSeafield has many haters.

Most of them are affiliates or people from German affiliate forums which differentiate between so-called contributing and cannibalistic affiliates.

to be better understood where this comes from:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...0&postcount=39

This only shows your way of constructing the world.


Most people dont like you. And because you hate affiliates, everybody must be an affiliate. Yeah makes perfectly sense.

Grow up, son. And have a nice life.

Go back into your forum and don't confuse the 2+2 community.

McSeafield,

Could you please share your views on what an online poker site should do to generate trust in its shuffling?

biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig mistake.



cbukowski is right.
mcseafield wont listen to anybody except his name is david sklansky.
he is always right without any chance of persuasion.
he derails every thread with his offtopic bs.
he is like the most hated person in german 2p2, and not only affiliates hate him, almost everybody does.
even the people who dont hate him are annoyed by some of his posts.

he lives in his own world and all of you are better off just ignoring him.



mark my words

Time for a merge, no?

@Josem

u get an answer. But please understand that in your case and with alll these blowflies here in this thread I need a little longer.

haters gonna hate

Sir could you please answer the questions about your poker sites card generation. I'll even condense it to one simple question.

Is every hand dealt on RealDeal poker taken straight from one of your patented shuffling machines and dealt to the table without any reordering of the cards besides the cut?

I am sure you know what I mean. I read almost all AP-Threads and have studied almost all your posts from the beginning. At this point of time I had only 6 month poker experience as a hobby poker player. Very little background. And what do you think was my impression? I have seen what trouble you had, the big number of guys who doubted cheating, the lying pokersite, the gaming commission which was considered as a joke and also the fortunate coincidences which helped you. This was your luck – it was not only your skill and intelligence to handle these situations and the big solidarity behind you in this forum. And without the help of very good guys in this forum you had never succeeded. I still remember when you opened an own website to find additional supporters and make noise in this world. It was necessary to apply such pressure.

You got your money back. And what happened then? The wrongdoer are still in action somewhere and play poker perhaps with the same software but a little bit more careful. Can't u see that?

You chanced the pokersite and stopped noisemaking. Do you think this helped to get poker in the USA or Europe legalized without solid house cleaning? You see it also in this thread. The blowflies are almost everywhere and their arguments are very weak – in fact they have no argument at all and no vision how to look into the future. But almost all have their economic interests in play, mostly affiliates who behave like parasites in this poker market. I have never seen similar parasites as a live gambler. They want to earn money in this greymarket without any risk, the players shall carry the whole risk (which is much higher than losing only during the game. I don’t enumerate all these risks because I know what would happen then).

Since that time I am a fighter for clean and fair circumstances in poker. Can't you understand why. Yes or No? You might me consider as a conspiracy theorist or rigtard. But be carefully. and read exactly what I have already written here in this thread and also in this forum or on G2+2. There is much more background which I have not yet indicated and I won’t normally do it here in this forums. All this is hard work. Here in this thread again. I have more opponents or haters than supporters. That's right.

But think also why. And if you know the reason than you might also understand why I sometimes act like an icecold hardliner. I know my opponents better than they know me.

I stop to argue here. And I know also why.


Do u really know what legitimate mean? I know there are different meanings for this word and u know I have some language problems. I ask you more specific. Do u know what lawful or constitutional mean? I am sure there are many differences between Australia, USA, Europe or Germany too if you try to understand the meaning. But from a German consideration almost all or most pokersites are unlawful. Btw: The IoM is not part of the EC. Don’t forget that.

All these points might be considered as legitimate. Yes. But as far as 3) and 4) is concerned you get a big problem with me. Use better the phrase “Creditworthy from a player’s perspective”. I am sure I have a complete other consideration what creditworthy means than u. I say this not as a poker player. Perhaps as a very experienced gambler or also as a business guy who has already analyzed tons of audit reports as an international manager and business consultant.

I disagree.

I will never say that this gaming auditor isn’t valuable to me. I respect this company very much. I said: This document says what is says. Almost nothing. What has been audited? Under which conditions? Where? When? For what time? Who has given the order for this audit? What was the order? Which audit standards are applicable? What is the norm? Who has accepted or prescribed the standards? The audit company or the pokersite itself? To whom is this company responsible? Is there a responsibility at all? Who pays for damage? Is there any legal effect for the player? Or is this document only a confirmation for the pokersite that this device produces under certain circumstances true random? Read this document again and again. Btw: This document has been recently renewed and it will be in a view month already be very old.

I am not obtuse about audits. I am in fact worked also as an auditor and I think like a very experienced auditor. And not as an self-professed genius. I acted as a certified public accountant and carried the whole risk for any mistake or wrong wording in my audit reports or testates. I wrote tons of caveats and know what any single word in a phrase of a caveat could mean.

It can be done. Gene knows that as a CPA and I have enough imagination to know it too. The idea is imo brilliant.



I have never seen a RNG device somewhere in a blackbox. Only in front of a computer as a hobby poker player. The only thing I know is that it is very hard business to confirm true random. The example above says it all. In any case it will always be difficult with or without special testing software. And how can u be sure that a pokersite always uses the same RNG device and whether such a device can’t be manipulated? I have no idea. I have never seen a pokerroom RNG device. Sofar I have no experience at all. That’s right.

I read something about PokerRNG. Perhaps someone has a professional editon which works on certain sites or with special RNG devices. No idea. I have never speculated or tested such stuff and will never do it.

.

RDP is not listed as an IoM license holder.

http://www.gov.im/gambling/licensees/

But its the real deal they dont need no stinking licensess.

Excatly this
You just cant argue with him. Its pointless. No matter what you say, he will not stop spamming.