people should start booking action on this imo

Yes

I wish the screen name to remain anonymous, but I was either 1st or tied with Paul wolfe for several months after full tilt opened in 2004 for the most full tilt frequent points. I was on a 28 day winning streak one night when I was playing in short handed 25/50NL . Got set of 8s beat by one pair, matasow had KQ & hit running full, A little later I flopped mid set 7s against crapstain set 8s. This started a downturn In which I ended up losing 15 straight days.

So turned a 28 day winning streak into a 15 day losing streak. Have you ever flipped a coin over 20 times on one side, then flipped 15 to the other. Anyway I knew online poker wanst on the square way before this, but for some reason had a decent account at FT for a while. Over the past 7 years I've been able to win approx 5% of my sessions & they all come in the 1st day after depositing if I hadn't played my account in a few weeks if that tells you anything.

^

Wow, I'm really sorry but you've just lost all credibility with this whole "I always knew it was rigged" bs.

Don't do it Gabe, we'll have the entire riggie/shill team here in no time. Please edit the last part of your post, trust me on this.......

Well your a little behind sir, 99% of the posters here know I turned down a large amount of sponsership money twice because of my beliefs on this site, so I don't think will change any credability issues. However if you ask around in most B&Ms, the large majority will agree & most get high blood pressure just talking about them.


I've tried to post mathmatical proof of targeting over the years with hand histories, however my account was banned everytime it was mentioned, so my wish is not to turn this thread into that debate. However when just your all in equity is off by 20% or so over tens of thousands of samples, it becomes pretty obvious.

Caseycjc, I'm well aware, trust me, been dealing with that for years. However I'm not going to lie to cater to anyone else's believes. Sometimes you got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything.

As a matter of fact, I wish the online sites were running at least temporarily. I could have Samoleus prove it on my account. Ive laid up to 10 to 1 before that no one could win playing on my account, so far no one ever has or even come close.

I actually thought you'd turned down the deals for other reasons (not wanting to prostitute yourself for money, hating the media, etc...)

Fwiw, tens of thousands is not anywhere near a significant number to even start mentioning statistical anomalities; anyone who has studied that field can tell you that, but if you've really turned down deals because of that belief, no amount of logic or proof is likely to convince you that you're wrong, so let's just agree to disagree and

/derail.

You must've not asked the right people or offered the right kind of money, because I can guarantee that a lot of HS players would've taken you up on this, so I have a really hard time believing that "offer" of yours.

There are databases of 10's of millions of hands which could be combined into 100's of millions of hands. Mathematically proving a rigged RNG would be extraordinarily easy with this data. Yet, no independent audit has been able to show any duplicity from Full Tilt or Stars.

i am starting to move to the 'this thread is a level' side of the fence. he cannot be serious

that you have 20% less roi because you can't use your ridiculously superior reading abilities?

I've played millions of hands online, so I've seen plenty. I was just throwing out an example of one study, However I just had this discussion with Joseph Cheong the other day, A statistcal T-test can show a 99.9% probability something isn't random on a small sample size if the margin of deviation is far enough from the mean.

this is so good it just has to be fattening

ahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahahhaha sure, but online poker isn't rigged

Gabe, you can run your HH's on here, http://www.ispokerrigged.com/ there's a tool available on the site.

If you don't have Poker Tracker you can get the trial version here,

http://www.pokertracker.com/

You have more than enough of a sample size to run a valid test.

The site is ran by Laughing Assasin, a trusted member of 2+2, so don't worry about down loading the tool.

casey, thanks for that link. it should be helpful and interesting!

Casey, I would like to know what type of variables they are actually testing, There are many ways to make math & stat's lie. If they are saying that I'll recieve KK every 221, Then I will, However will it test to see that I only win the blinds on the ones I win & that when I receive action I'm getting sets flopped on them & running it into AA. There's no way to guage it from a program like they have because they don't always know what the opponents have in the hand. That's how they get away with it. Parody, Keep those tables full.

It was increasingly important in the early days of playing poker for parody because they players were extremely bad, Over the years most will learn to play a little & balance out the edge. If they had not run the sites like this in the beginning, We would have seen many of them shut down because of over supply from the Rounder's money maker boom, then sharks & house win all money. No players but sharks left. This process would have happened much quicker than it has.

I know players that actually made a living by opening new accounts , even under friends names etc. so they could get the honeymoon period of run good in the beginning.

Maybe you missed it:
There are databases of 10's of millions of hands which could be combined into 100's of millions of hands. Mathematically proving a rigged RNG would be extraordinarily easy with this data. Yet, no independent audit has been able to show any duplicity from Full Tilt or Stars.

Your theory about sets flopping against KK or AA more often than expected or any other set up hands could be tested with this many hands. No analysis has ever been able to show any component of the game to be anything other than random. You, like every other rig theorist, has zero evidence other than anecdote to back up your claims. With the available hand information out there, proving rigged components of the game mathematically would be a cakewalk.

Gabe, Laughing Assassin goes into every aspect of the testing on the site.

If you go to the "full report" section he explains, in detail, every aspect of the test. (Tried to link but it wouldn't take)

He started off on the probability thread pretty much thinking IP was rigged and wanted to run some analysis.
At first he got the typical crap from everyone but people started to realize he was serious and competent in his math skills. He got some help developing his hypothesis and it's developed from there.

As far as I can tell and based on the history I witnessed I honestly believe he went into this with good intentions and has reported factual data.

I contacted Nat Arem one time & had put together some hand histories, was going to have him or some others run through them, However a few days later my computer crashed & I lost all of them, I still have some sent to an old email , I can probably put together some.

Is there anyway to retrieve old histories , I could prove it without a shadow of a doubt, the math is so far off no one would ever believe it.

Ah, selective hand histories, great for a meaningful statistical analysis. Do you know anything about math?