y are you and a few others always so angry and obsessed with trying to hurt the feelings of anybody who might not trust the online poker companies?

do you need to talk to somebody? ill listen to your problems. maybe need to get laid? whats wrong little dick? not making enough money? need a vacation? winning too much money? too happy? life's too perfect for your taste?

Last time I checked it was you who whined and cried about online poker being possibly rigged.

Did I hurt your feelings, is the internet too hard for you, did you cry a lot when you read my post?


poor little moron. Here, have some candy.

who whined and cried youre the one bitching about all the rigtards

I see d'Artagnan finally showed up

Everything about those hands is unbelievable. From the odds to the stakes. This super user deal manipulator, who is stupid enough to rig all games and stakes, will hopefully face justice soon.

I didn't want to say it was rigged from inception. The legit model is clearly viable.

All I am saying is that it's easy to rig the deck with card-removal software to produce any pattern you like; that this software was developed on a few major sites several years ago (by their own declarations); that this software acts contrary to the ethics of their legally authenticated deal; and that for some in the poker industry, it was a rational, market-driven decision when they decided to cheat everybody out of the fair game they paid for.

There are few situations in life when every and forever can be applied. Poker, business and personalities aren't amongst them.

cite

Don't poker site employees get refresher courses?

As you obviously missed yours, allow me to quote from Pokerstars' official handbook:- "101 ways to rig the deck and not get caught"

Sorry, that's not what it's actually called, here is a real link:-

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...-games-303618/

And here is a less biased discussion:-

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

And here is another biased discussion:-

How is that I glean these facts from the wider internet, blogs, professional players and 2+2, yet can't find it anywhere on Pokerstars' or 888 official site or find any evidence of how this fits in with the "truly random" RNG which card rooms have officially validated?

Oh I will tell you. It's because when card rooms manipulate the deal, for ANY reason, they are no longer running the service you assumed they were nor are they running a fully independently certified and regulated RNG.

Question: Can stars, 888 and others manipulate their deal at will through auxiliary functions added to a certified RNG process?

Answer: YES THEY CAN AND YES THEY DO

Question: Has any major site ever published whole site results?

Answer: NO THEY HAVE NOT

Question: Why do you think this is?

Answer: THEY WANT TO PLEAD THE 5TH WHILE YOU DRINK THE 5TH

Wow, why did I even ask....you are so fos, I actually pity you right now.

Quit poker, dude, it totally destroyed you

I knew he was talking about that triple draw thing where they programmed the game so that even if all the cards are used and discards are reshuffled to be used, a player can not draw his own discarded cards. It obviously has nothing to do with rigging the deal. It is a published rule that in their triple draw games, players can't redraw their discarded cards and the software/hardware does exactly what the rule says. The legitimate issue that some people did have with this in the 2+2 thread he linked to, is that the rule wasn't publicized well enough and most people would probably assume that such was not the rule. I didn't read the other link he posted.

It obviously has nothing to do with removing certain cards from the deck to favor one player over another. Obviously, the software/hardware could be programmed/made to do this, but also obviously, the above doesn't really have anything to do with this.

Yep

It's quite good

So that is precisely the point. I think, obviously, that capable technology already known to be implement by card rooms today is fairly relevant. It blows arguments about the technical complexity of rigs clean out of the water for starters.

I don't think anybody needed to know about the triple draw thing to know that it was possible to write programs to choose cards based on different criteria. That such is possible seems to be your point; or at least is what I can gather is your point. If so, you are right. I thought it was pretty obvious already on its own.

The triple draw criteria seems pretty simple: Randomly select a card to deal, but if the selected card to be dealt to a player is a card that he previously discarded, then do not deal it and instead randomly select a new card to deal. Repeat until the card selected to be dealt is not a card that was discarded by such player. It is possible to imagine other criteria that would be much simpler and other criteria that would be much more complicated.

Riggies seem very excited about the fact that a computer program can be made to deal a specific card, as if that is epiphany worthy. Even this program could have had that functionality in it if it wanted:

https://www.google.ca/search?q=intel...Q&ved=0CCwQsAQ


Who cares? Pretty much every deal manipulation rig proposed to date would be easily caught within a day if that, with the only exceptions being the mystical ones like the thousands of rooms use mind control while HEM- Tracker are in on it style crazy ones.


Looks like retread riggies with new user names are still at it, which is the definition of boring, but to help them they may as well add Planet Poker, the "university study," the "five aces" hand and select memory of some of ipoker's isitrigged test results to their list of victories, alongside the nothing to do with rigging triple draw debate that zero riggies ever read in detail.

All the best.

Any argument I've seen ITT about the technical complexity of a rig wasn't about simply being able to do it, which I think everyone should be able to agree would be trivially easy, but about being able to do so without detection. Your example doesn't address that in any way.

Last 3 posts made me realize that I'm also fos.

Don't know what I was thinking when I proposed an AI for a rig to work.

Must have been something around "who gets selected to lose, when exactly does he get selected, what about the other players and their holdings" and all that for 100k players at once.

It's actually much simpler: You can surely create a system which picks specific players and deals them non foldable action boards and lets them lose to a true 1 outer on the river.

Only problem is, like the posters above already explained, it's easily detectable. If you alter a random sequence in any way it's not random anymore. this has also been repeated like 5000 times in here.

tl;dr:

Artificial intelligence or not, it's impossible to build an undetectable rig, and that's all that matters, who cares if it can be done theoretically.

The ones that become very difficult and expensive to implement technically are the riggie theories about dealing nonrandom cards for a desired result and then keeping up with it in a database, and then making it up somehow later to come out looking like random. That's essentially impossible as it gets exponentially larger with every nonrandom hand dealt, due to the other players involved in the hand.

And to your point, the amount that the rig significantly affects a site's rake is directly proportional to the ease of detection. If one is significant, the other is significant to a similar degree.

Funny stuff!

I think the question here is, if you write this B.S. enough, can you make yourself believe its true. Shills will be shills, but come on! As anybody who can count knows, if you use a 52 card deck, the cards can be distributed in any fashion desired. Which is why a software program ultimately places the cards in your hand and on the table. Nothing funny detected in hand histories. It is the reason however why thousands of people see that the deal if far from random.

There are plenty of reasons why thousands of people see that the deal is far from random. The deal being far from random is not one of them, however.

Edit: Are you suggesting that "people" are better able to detect non-randomness than computers and statistical software?

I realize you are just a troll, but this is the stupidest thing you and your riggie brethren repeat endlessly. Thinking that you can see something with your eyes while playing a computer poker game, that is not recorded in the hand histories stored on that computer, is ludicrous. It's an exact recording of your observations. And, it isn't subject to the flaws of memory. If "thousands of people see" it, then why can't just one of them show the rest of us from their record of what they saw? Why don't a few of you get together and pool your evidence to make it even more clear? Why hasn't anyone shown the evidence in the history of this forum?

i can understand when you run bad, it can seem rigged and get very frustrating i have been there before i understand. at these times you just need something to lift your spirits every time you get down like that you should just refer to this laughter is good for the soul.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qALXIDpjHBY

Blah, diversion, blah blah, waffling, blah blah, blah, smoke and mirrors.

SO.......... do you really believe the crap that you spew?? yes or no?
Ill bet your hero monteroy does. His been spewing B.S. for years now in here.

How could you possibly not believe this? And if you don't, are you able to provide a credible argument as to why?

Possible, sure. The prevailing wind has been though that it would be technically demanding, requiring highly sophisticated algorithms or constant monitoring.

My point is that in truth, it's incredibly easy for sites to use card-removal to alter the odds yet still offer a "random" game that would pass inspection. This is not a given fact for many, including yourself perhaps.

There is true beauty in the power of this simple concept to surreptitiously rule any way you see fit.

Even IF hand histories are amalgamated or thoroughly audited, the picture will look entirely normal over the macro scale, e.g. AA vs AK. If some players win at exceptionally high rates with both AA and AK, while others rarely win with either, the big picture is entirely within expectations. It's trivial to make daily adjustments and produce a graduated scale of pre-selection that optimizes revenue and passes inspection.

A huge point of denial for some is the risk involved in such a process. It's virtually nil.

I could set you up all day long for years, 3 standard deviations from the mean. Your results would prove precisely nothing other than showing you lie within the verified 99.7% of aggregate expectations. Only an insider or hacker, or regulator with real-time source code access and metadata, could prove such a rig exists to the benefit or detriment of individual players.

NO, but I will tell you it is a fact under one special circumstance ...... when the people are looking for things that the machines are not. If this special circumstance did not exist, human analysis would be obsolete.

I must ask:- Do you believe this post is intrinsically truthful? If not, why not?

No you can't, and this is but one of the big fallacies in your post. As the sample gets bigger, a constant rig of any kind will become statistically greater and greater as measured in standard deviations. To stay under some threshold of suspicion you have to continually decrease the frequency of the rig until eventually it becomes insignificant.

You have other huge flaws in your reasoning too. Such as thinking an "amalgamated" average of anything is the way to test for randomness. Tests for randomness look at the entire sequence.

Don't lecture condescendingly about things you don't know much about.

You might want to give up at this point. The more you "shills" dance around the truth of the matter, the more ridiculous you sound.
Im referring to the masses at this point in time that realize there is nothing random about the deal in online poker. This would include all the people that come to read the "rigged" thread for whom you write these posts for.

The only one here dancing is you, avoiding all the questions you can't answer, and commenting on posts without addressing any of the substantive points contained in them, like usual.

Unless one of the people who know they are being screwed over based on what they have seen use their hand history to prove it. You made a claim that they remove a Q from the deck when you have QQ vs AK. Lets see some numbers.

Or just keep rambling on about what they "could" be doing and therefore must be doing.

Except you've "proved" it to yourself based on analysis of your own hands, from memory. What makes you a special flower who is targeted by a rig rather than someone who has just run badly but within reasonable expectations?