FACT - Some people steal from others

FACT - GTheJester would benefit financially from stealing from his family!

FACT - We can't be sure that GTheJester isn't stealing from his family!

Anybody that suggests GTheJester is a thieving scumbag has a valid argument
Those that disagree have a valid counter argument

We just don't know!

How can "the rig" be detected by playing and/or observing hands, but not be detectable by reviewing the same hands later in the hand histories?

Doesn't make sense.

Actually, it makes perfect sense when the process is construct a riggie theory based on a hand you saw that stands out to you in some manner.

I have no doubt I can save various hands today and construct a variety of riggie theories with more "proof" than pretty much all the riggies have provided combined. Not that hard with selective choosing of hands and a bit of creativity, even if I do not share their innate paranoid tendencies.

I could even go so far as ask a riggie for a specific belief and no doubt get lots of hands that prove it (Royal Flush riggie theories not included!), as well as lots of hands that disprove it simply by which ones I cherry pick from the day.

I can probably even do that with some of their vague theories as well (bad players get rewarded post-flop).


Most of their theories are basic bad beats venting of routine types of hands (many of which are not even bad beats) that happen every day, so it would be no challenge at all to provide "proof" that supports them if I was inclined.

The crazier ones like the global poker conspiracies involving translators are obviously beyond the ability of being proven or not at the tables themselves.

http://www.ispokerrigged.com/Is%20On...%20Rigged.html

(FYP)

So, what you are saying is that you cannot even take the first, faltering, step towards proving something that you claim is 'obvious'.

You can't even attempt to come up with a cogent and coherent theory as to how a site would rig the deal so that it cannot be detected.

You've just managed to deploy at least three of the standard rigtard smokescreen responses reserved for when they are backed into a corner.

C'mon, dilbert, you have a God given opportunity to prove to all the riggies, and anyone undecided, that the shills cannot demonstrate that the rig you are sure is taking place must be detectable.

What are you waiting for?

What are you frightened of?

Internet glory is beckoning you and you are cowering in a corner.

I've experience the opposite of that. I keep a deck of cards next to my computer, and after horrendous beats I often deal out the exact hand setup to see if it happens in real life. I am shocked by how often the best hand holds up. It is a night and day difference. Also, try dealing out hands face up 10 handed. You might be surprised at how often all 10 hands aren't playable.

So, you were losing money at an alarming rate and you were running hot ... exactly!!

My bankroll is currently dwindling and I can't seem to get out of this rut. This current session I lost all in prelop AA vs 1010, 10 on flop. Another hand I had 1010 on a 4 5 9 flop. Got all in vs 2 2. Turn 3, river 2. Lost with a AK vs AJ all in. Lost with AQ vs AJ all in. I did manage a triple up with JJ vs AQ vs A10. Flop was A J X. Turn Q for drama. Of course the Ace came on the flop as it usually does.

Did PokerStars unveil Zoom Poker before or after acquiring Full Tilt? Perhaps PokerStars purchased Full Tilt because they were afraid another buyer might discover the rig in the software and come public with it. Just an idea

Before.

And how does this make any sense? PokerStars didn't have anything to do with Full Tilt's software before they purchased Full Tilt.

No, I was just thinking that perhaps FTP had a patent on speed poker, so that would be a reason for PStars to buy.

sullypoker35 aka blatantlyrigged, not welcome in this thread under any name.

The easy answer is that a rig could be evident in your hand histories but you write it off as variance. Or perhaps you are quoting from poker tracker/holdem manager statistics that are created by monitoring a corrupted system!

Unless you have a million hands worth of live poker histories to validate your online histories how can you prove that what you are seeing is statistically correct.

All you are saying is that because no one has proved it is rigged then its not rigged.

We are not talking here of a site dealing out 5 aces in a hand. The hands would play out normally but with an inherent desired outcome; how or to what ends we do not know.

So you can't win an argument just by asking for evidence contrary to what you think; you should justify what you think by giving some evidence.

I can come up with an example of how a game might be rigged but whether the sites would be doing it that way is another question.

And can I make it clear I am unsure whether it is rigged or not. I can see reasons why it could be, yet I can also think of reasons why it wouldn't be.

I have kept records of my poker playing for 10 years or so now, and I have played on in excess of over 25 different sites run on a number of different operators; yet there are operators I will avoid purely because I don't get the same results whilst playing the same strategy at the same stakes.

Could be variance but thats my choice!

The bummer with that, from the riggies POV, is that when you take an actual sample that is some specific size the specifics of confidence limits are mathematically sound and are used daily for many purposes around the world to control and direct life critical systems.

They are not some mystical mumbo-jumbo that someone can wave at any evidence that he or she does not like to make it go away.

It is up to the person making the complaint to provide evidence that is trusted both by himself and those that he is trying to convince.

You don't necessarily need 1m hands - depending on the degree of the rig. What you do need is a statistically valid sample.

And if you don't have a statistically valid sample then there is no way that you can claim to have reliably detected a rig. What's true for the analyst using maths is true for the player looking for patterns in their head.

No. What we are saying is that because there a hundreds of thousands of players with billions of HH's between them and a lot of those players seem to be very suspicious that the deal is rigged, the fact that not one single such player has ever provided statistically significant evidence of a rig indicates that there is a high probability that there is no rig.

Well, one of the ends would have to be that some player wins less than he should have done and as soon as that happens over a reasonable sample size then the rig will yield to statistical analysis.

Hundreds of thousands of players, billions of hand histories, no credible evidence of rigging ever provided. That is evidence.

OK, come up with an example of how it could be rigged where I cannot explain how such rigging could be detected. Unless you can do that you are dead in the water.


Indeed.

And no one is stopping people who believe that others are using mystical waves for mind control from wearing foil helmets.

[QUOTE=Wiki;37543394]

Well, one of the ends would have to be that some player wins less than he should have done and as soon as that happens over a reasonable sample size then the rig will yield to statistical analysis. /QUOTE]

To me you just described a downswing, or perhaps the previous results took for that person were for a losing player who had an upswing and then the results just returned to normal expectation. You can't prove that wasn't the case.

What if the rig wasn't on a reasonable sample size, just a game here and there flattening the slope, would you detect that? Who can argue what any players expectation from playing poker is? Its dependant on skill and luck and that in its self is a contentious issue.

This debate to me is not a question of if online poker is rigged or not anymore, because I have made my own decisions and actions on that.

However people are putting their trust and a lot of money in the poker sites and yet we know nothing of their workings. If you search the T&C's they mention nothing about the fact that it is as fair as a live dealt pack of cards. We have certificates for the RNG but not for the delivery of that random pack to the virtual felt.

35% of your poll is a large sample who think it is rigged. Don't you think it would be easy for the poker sites to come out and assuage peoples worries?

35% is pretty bad when you consider this is a dedicated, merged rigged only thread and many riggies have voted many times under several gimmicks.

Rigging is a non issue in the actual industry, and the fact that it cannot even get to 50% in a rigged thread shows the lack of power and numbers of actual riggies.

I always found it funny that riggies championed that 35% as an accomplishment of sorts, given the context and location of that poll. I would have thought they would have suggested 2+2 was in on it to lower their results in it.

All the best.

As I say this will run and run until a site takes the issue by the scruff of the neck.

Now on to my reason for joining here, to see if I can get good debate on strategy.

Cheers all and GL

This is a non issue for the sites and industry outside of riggie threads.

There are several strategy forums here to talk strategy, and you will see how much riggie content exists there (hint, basically none).

All the best.

Jesus person behind the Monteroy stick, you post all day everyday. Get a life sir/mam. You jump on every single riggie quote and try to lead them towards the light. Help yourself

You say that about everyone who posts when you reply, even if they have not posted in a while, but then riggies tend to have very short term memories and attention spans.

You post more than anyone in the thread at this point in terms of quantity of posts per day, and if you add in your past accounts you are way ahead of everyone.

Next time create another gimmick to post the above, and we can all pretend to not recognize you. You also will be able to vote again to try to get that 35% higher!

All the best.

Monteroy, Wiki, The biggest donkey, you all have a nice posting style, did you 3 go to the same school of shill/employee/affiliate?

I am just curious.

I was just wondering

Is this a limerick if I add two more lines?

Online poker is rigged

With math.

Some of us did go to school, that is correct. I am sure you made the best of what was dealt to you in that regard.

Remember, if you are going to create a shill conspiracy (which I always encourage), all I ask is a creative title like "Grand Rigmaster." We can give you one as well that is appropriate like the "Little Riggie."

All the best.

you mean you went to school and now find yourself stuck in a riggie thread 24/7 the last few years. UGH!!!! Talk about the school of hard knocks

Correct, as I said earlier some of us have gone to school. I am not quite sure why this is such an accomplishment to you, and perhaps a member of your family can achieve that one day as well by attending a school.

I back poker players, Sunday is an extremely busy day so I am watching a lot of players. This thread is a fun diversion while doing that, and I am trying the lowball approach with a base level back and forth with you for a bit as a change of pace in the remote hope you will say something funny or clever (so far, no luck). I would ask why you are here so much, because you have no income source in poker to do at the same time. In fact, do you have any income source at all? Why do welfare guys like you always leech off the rest of society in that way? OK, your new nickname is the "welfare riggie."

All the best.

Monteroy is cool

I'm sorry for being a fairly articulate person. Don't think there is any shame in that game.

As for me being a shill? That is complete non-sense. If you read everything I said you either think I am a complete lunatic or that some of the things I stated are probable.

Somebody above posted that I could easily check hand histories to see if I am being cheated. That is not the case in my situation.

The way I view the game as cheating me is absolutely undetectable.

Take a look at Ed Millers posts. I'm sure you have all read his books. These posts are from way back in 2008.

Seeing as Ed has a substantial amount of interest in how the poker world is doing, seems strange he would even plant an ounce of doubt into any poker players mind that online poker COULD be rigged.

And the fashion that he thinks it is possible is UNDETECTABLE.

http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/a...et-caught.html

And this one regarding deck manipulation.

http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/a...ine-poker.html