Interesting theory. In case you aren't aware of it, there are other sites out there, and the posters who are "ganging up on people who are questioning the status quo" seem to do the same for a whole range of sites. Why is that?

Eep, hope I haven't jeopardized their PS jobs by mentioning this.

It's also easier to go through life assuming everything is rigged and thinking that anyone who dares to disagree or ask for evidence to support beliefs and theories is "never questioning anything and sticking with the pack".

Believe it or not, there are a whole wide range of positions between the two extremes.

P.S. I don't think sociopath means what you think it means.

For fun

What are the odds of getting quads 2 hands in a row ? It happened to me in a tournament at Unibet.

https://www.reddit.com/r/poker/comme...a_row_can_you/

No that thread is about flopping quads.

Chance of quads by river using at least one hole card is 1 in 980. So to happen on your next two hands just square that. Then realize that probability increases the more hands you play and eventually approaches 100%.

I don't doubt that you're right. The point I was trying to make ( poor attempt, I'll admit ) was that if he googles the question, I'm pretty sure he'll find the answer.

And just as a sidenote, I'm pretty sure that if an online site had a "Rig Departmnt", then they'll possess at least above average intelligence and not rig the hands in an obvious manner by giving quads in a row, too many straight flushes etc. Like the hands that stick to your head. And needless to say, of course they wouldn't rig it in the action flop way. That's if the point of the rig is to make money.

Oh ****, you burned me real good. Luckily I'm still not a rigtard so I have that going for me.

So funny, I cashed like 30% after I deposited with lots of great cards and now 0% cash rate even in Spin & Go games with hitting nothing and all bluffs faced lucky opponets!!

Seriously, this ****ing pokerstars and probably all others are rigged...

PS is manipulating the cards on Postflop. I can't prove that but by observing you can realise that. Just play multitable Zoom for a few months.
Some periodic times you win. For example you hit sets easily. You win with runner runner. Your all in equity is $-15, but BB/100 is +2.
Some periodic times you lose. For example you hit set but, opponent ridiculously hits runner runner straight. You hit set on dry board but opponent hits overset. Your all in equity is $2, but BB/100 is -15.
You cant realize that by calculating because they are balancing. You can see just by observing.

Along with every casino you lose in. LOL.

Oh look, another riggie whose eyes and brain are more powerful than a computer!

That sounds exactly like a normal random deal.

People think random means evenly distributed but it doesn't. Lots of clustering is how randomness behaves.

Is this because you are unable to collect hand histories, and then analyze the stats? If so, there are probably people who could help you with that.

How does this make sense to you? If they're "balancing", but there are anomalies that you can observe, then you must be making some distinction in your observations, and you could do the same with hand histories. Whatever these "periodic times" are, you could filter for them with software, just like you're doing with your brain now.

some periods you win. these are winning periods.

some periods you lose. these are losing periods.

how come i never seem to win in losing periods. and why arent my losing periods ever dispersed through my winning periods?

and why isnt it ever december in january?

This point is important and generally not well understood.

I may have told this story before but it may be a story worth retelling. In my introductory probability class, the teacher gave each student a single dice (a die). He said that all of the dice were regular normal dice except for one die which was special in a way that he would explain later.

Each student then rolled their die for several minutes and recorded each roll on a piece of paper. After awhile the teacher asked us to stop. He then asked anyone who thought they may have the special die to raise their hand.

Around half the class raised their hand! The teacher asked each student who had raised their hand to guess what the property of the special die was. Some students were very specific ("a 4 always follows a 2 except if the roll preceding the 2 was another 2"). Some students were more general ("odd numbers come in groups of 3 while even numbers come in groups of 2 or 4"). One student was positive that he had the special die since he had observed a sequence of one one followed by two twos followed by three threes.

Anyway, you can surely anticipate which student the teacher said had the special die. None of them. All the dice were regular normal dice. After the howls of disbelief subsided, the teacher then led a discussion on what the "experiment" demonstrated:

- Pure randomness generates clustering

- Relatedly, regularity is quite rare (for example, no student rolled exactly one of each of the numbers one through six in their first six rolls)

- There are an unending supply of "patterns" that random sequences can generate

- Humans are constantly pattern-seeking (it is virtually impossible for humans to turn off the pattern-seeking part of their brain).

I don't remember much of what I learned in high school, but I definitely remember that lesson.

Clearly this story demonstrates that your teacher was a PS employee.

Fair enough. I guess it took "them" 5 years to learn to defend a middle pair, and another 5 years to learn to defend with a bottom pair? Slow going seeing as how just about every game or sport that humans play has evolved significantly over just about any 10 year period- especially in the information age.

... Upon further inspection, I knew there was something "off" about your post. Is this the first jungmit post without any spelling errors?!?! Can someone smarter than me please calculate that probability?

Most errors are not spelling errors , they are typing errors.

After absolute poker situation its proven online poker HAS been 100% rigged.

People thought it was just cash games but it was tournies too. So that is proof the games can be rigged and it can be cash games or tournies. Can poker stars or any other online poker site cheat? Of course whos stopping them? There is nobody looking over their shoulder. Ask any software developer if online poker software can be manipulated and not just by the house but by people who play on the table that know how to hack software. They will tell you of course.

So we have to accept online poker has been rigged and the argument its a fair game is delusional illogical thinking. That argument is over. You can never know 100% if the game is fair any time you sit and play online poker you can't see what is going on behind the scenes there is no surveillance watching them and its not hard to manipulate software online.

So we should look at solutions. We all want a fair game so the players with the most skill show whos boss on the tables. I am interested in seeing if a online poker site is made in a decentralized manner where nobody can hack the site. The person that creates it has no control over it. And we actually get 100% proven fair game where no hacking is possible and set up in a way bots are not allowed to grind. If that can happen that poker site will get tons of poker players on it. To know we actually lost on a site that is 100% secure and safe with real opponents that is completely decentralized is I think the answer to online poker players problems. Then the excuses have to end for everyone.

I think one day we will have something like that where someone actually makes a poker site that is safe and secure for everyone. But as of now we have to grind out being on sites that can be rigged at any time and their is no way of knowing what these people are doing behind the scenes. Use proper bank roll management, get off fishy tables, and get off your lazy butt and go to casino.

Why do they need to use above average intelligence when 90% of the players on the table have no intelligence of what they are doing on the tables? You know how much work it would take them to play every hand in a way to make it look like its not rigged? I agree they can't and would not do that thats to time consuming. To many tables are going at once. If I was going to rig a poker site i would have the rng identify the players in the pots hole cards and set up juicy flops for them to go all in. My goal would be making rake so I would want huge flops for all the players in the pot. That way its more exciting and its bigger pots and I make more rake for my business. If a guy has 87s and another guy has AA i would flop K77. they going to go bust. The only real winner would be me collecting all dat juicy rake

No, what happened at UB & AP was not rigging, at least not in the way being discussed in this thread.

Sure they could - I hope you don't bring this up because you think anyone is arguing otherwise.

Well, in the case of Cereus, the players.

Yes, there is - the players.

By the house? Of course. Undetectably? I don't think so.

Could the software be manipulated by hackers? I suppose this should be possible in theory, but to my knowledge it's never been done server side to this point, at least not that anyone has caught.

No, it hasn't been, and no, thinking a particular game could be fair is not delusional. Thinking that every game you play in, live or online, is always fair, would be delusional.

You might find this thread of interest:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...uture-1636827/

LOL.

It's a good thing that you don't run a poker site then, because that sounds like a great way to make sure people lose their money as quickly as possible, while bringing in the minimum rake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

But what happens when things really do happen in patterns tho?

Most likley it would be AA vs 78 and the flop would be 652 or a flush draw for 78 or some other set up type flop. Or k87.

Did you miss the last sentence of https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...ostcount=83876 where again it is mentioned that rigging in that way makes less money for the site than by the random deal they use?

He doesn't agree with that statement.

Prove it. I want to see a big enough sample size. In the long run they make more due to keeping the games exciting. But if u got proof we would love to see it

Sample size is not the issue (which naturally you fail to understand). "Action hands" produce bloated pots, which means larger clumps of money move at a time. That means people who lose will often times lose a good chunk of their online bankroll, and the players who win will often times cash out a lot of those winnings. Add to that that at many limits the rake is capped long before all the money goes in, so the action hand creates pots of which much is not even marginally raked. As well, action hands get remembered, so they would be the last thing a site would artificially produce. A much better rig is the "non action hand" theory that you can read here (posted at a time when actual serious discussion took place in this thread)



https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...postcount=9416


You play live poker, just ask the room managers if limit poker or no limit poker generates more money for the house. The answer is limit because the money moves between players at a slower rate while being raked the whole time. In contrast two dudes going all in for $1,000 a piece at 5/10 generate a couple bucks rake and a lot of the time that extra $1,000 never gets recycled back into the games to generate more rake.

You often talked about how the rooms try to even things out, which in theory is exactly what the rooms do want - they want money flowing in smaller clumps back and forth, generating rake the whole time. Now apparently you are into action hands, which (while you will not understand) is pretty much the opposite of what you were saying before. Not the first time you directly contradicted yourself, and will certainly not be the last. It's fine, people like you never keep track of your thoughts, nor bother to consider what they mean, because in the end you do not understand them, just as you did not understand any of this post.

All the best.