Is Online Poker rigged

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

I Need Money

Enthusiast
well guys I played a freeroll today and I noticed something very interesting. I read something about if your a holding a pair then odds are so is someone else. well im starting to believe that now.

Alastair John is at seat 0 with 3730.
jochg2121 is at seat 1 with 510.
OffRoadGrrl2 is at seat 2 with 5795.
hero is at seat 3 with 5130.
vote4pdro is at seat 4 with 1525.
Shadow_13 is at seat 5 with 2855.
unfocused is at seat 6 with 1430.
Mongoose is at seat 7 with 540.
DubSatchel2 is at seat 8 with 580.
rizzo116 is at seat 9 with 2640.
The button is at seat 0.

jochg2121 posts the small blind of 15.
OffRoadGrrl2 posts the big blind of 30.
Alastair John: -- --
jochg2121: -- --
OffRoadGrrl2: -- --
Hero: 2h Jh
vote4pdro: -- --
Shadow_13: -- --
unfocused: -- --
Mongoose: -- --
DubSatchel2: -- --
rizzo116: -- --
Pre-flop:

Hero folds. vote4pdro folds. Shadow_13 calls.
unfocused calls. Mongoose folds. DubSatchel2 folds.
rizzo116 folds. Alastair John folds. jochg2121
goes all-in for 510. OffRoadGrrl2 folds.
Shadow_13 calls. unfocused goes all-in for
1430. Shadow_13 calls.
Tournament all-in showdown -- players show:

jochg2121 shows Td Ts.
Shadow_13 shows 6c 6h.
unfocused shows As Ad.

Flop (board: Ac Tc 4h):

(no action in this round)

Turn (board: Ac Tc 4h 6s):

(no action in this round)

River (board: Ac Tc 4h 6s Qh):

(no action in this round)


Showdown:

jochg2121 has Td Ts Ac Tc Qh: three tens.
Shadow_13 has 6c 6h Ac 6s Qh: three sixes.
unfocused has As Ad Ac Tc Qh: three aces.

Hand #7704097-28 Summary:

No rake is taken for this hand.
unfocused wins the main pot 1590 with three aces.
unfocused wins the side pot 1840 with three aces.
----------------------------------------------------------------


Alastair John is at seat 0 with 2800.
OffRoadGrrl2 is at seat 2 with 5190.
Hero is at seat 3 with 5700.
vote4pdro is at seat 4 with 990.
Shadow_13 is at seat 5 with 1185.
unfocused is at seat 6 with 2770.
Mongoose is at seat 7 with 1380.
DubSatchel2 is at seat 8 with 580.
rizzo116 is at seat 9 with 4140.
The button is at seat 8.




----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hand #7704097-37 at Sun315amA-089 (No Limit tournament Hold'em)
Powered by UltimateBet
Started at 14/Aug/05 04:03:25

Alastair John is at seat 0 with 3040.
OffRoadGrrl2 is at seat 2 with 5190.
Hero is at seat 3 with 5620.
vote4pdro is at seat 4 with 990.
Shadow_13 is at seat 5 with 1185.
unfocused is at seat 6 with 2730.
Mongoose is at seat 7 with 1380.
DubSatchel2 is at seat 8 with 540.
rizzo116 is at seat 9 with 4060.
The button is at seat 9.

Alastair John posts the small blind of 20.
OffRoadGrrl2 posts the big blind of 40.
Alastair John: -- --
OffRoadGrrl2: -- --
Hero: Jh 4c
vote4pdro: -- --
Shadow_13: -- --
unfocused: -- --
Mongoose: -- --
DubSatchel2: -- --
rizzo116: -- --
Pre-flop:

Hero folds. vote4pdro folds. Shadow_13 goes all-in
for 1185. unfocused folds. Mongoose folds.
DubSatchel2 folds. rizzo116 folds. Alastair John
folds. OffRoadGrrl2 calls.
Tournament all-in showdown -- players show:

OffRoadGrrl2 shows Qh Qs.
Shadow_13 shows Ah Ad.

Flop (board: 4d 2s Jd):

(no action in this round)

Turn (board: 4d 2s Jd Ac):

(no action in this round)

River (board: 4d 2s Jd Ac Tc):

(no action in this round)


Showdown:

OffRoadGrrl2 has Qh Qs Jd Ac Tc: a pair of queens.
Shadow_13 has Ah Ad Jd Ac Tc: three aces.

Hand #7704097-37 Summary:

No rake is taken for this hand.
Shadow_13 wins 2390 with three aces.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Hand #7704029-77 at Sun315amA-025 (No Limit tournament Hold'em)
Powered by UltimateBet
Started at 14/Aug/05 04:54:44

smokewazhere is at seat 0 with 7670.
yarmith is at seat 1 with 9645.
osuguy22 is at seat 2 with 315.
justcmon is at seat 3 with 14485.
Hero is at seat 4 with 9700.
LovDocta is at seat 5 with 4060.
snowman3 is at seat 6 with 8945.
Western Star is at seat 7 with 11195.
aces4aces is at seat 8 with 2800.
crackedAAces is at seat 9 with 34315.
The button is at seat 4.

LovDocta posts the small blind of 100.
snowman3 posts the big blind of 200.
smokewazhere: -- --
yarmith: -- --
osuguy22: -- --
justcmon: -- --
Hero: 7d 4s
LovDocta: -- --
snowman3: -- --
Western Star: -- --
aces4aces: -- --
crackedAAces: -- --
Pre-flop:

Western Star folds. aces4aces folds. crackedAAces
folds. smokewazhere calls. yarmith calls.
osuguy22 folds. justcmon raises to 1100. Hero
folds. LovDocta goes all-in for 4060. snowman3
folds. smokewazhere folds. yarmith folds.
justcmon calls.
Tournament all-in showdown -- players show:

justcmon shows Kd Kc.
LovDocta shows Qs Qd.

Flop (board: Jh As Ad):

(no action in this round)

Turn (board: Jh As Ad Qc):

(no action in this round)

River (board: Jh As Ad Qc 5c):

(no action in this round)


Showdown:

justcmon has Kd Kc As Ad Qc: two pair, aces and kings.
LovDocta has Qs Qd As Ad Qc: full house, queens full of aces.

Hand #7704029-77 Summary:

No rake is taken for this hand.
LovDocta wins 8720 with full house, queens full of aces.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Hand #7704029-97 at Sun315amA-025 (No Limit tournament Hold'em)
Powered by UltimateBet
Started at 14/Aug/05 05:12:17

smokewazhere is at seat 0 with 10220.
yarmith is at seat 1 with 13340.
caltex40 is at seat 2 with 5740.
justcmon is at seat 3 with 10425.
Hero is at seat 4 with 14600.
LovDocta is at seat 5 with 0 (sitting out).
snowman3 is at seat 6 with 22770.
Western Star is at seat 7 with 6295.
crackedAAces is at seat 9 with 35480.
The button is at seat 4.

snowman3 posts the big blind of 300.
smokewazhere: -- --
yarmith: -- --
caltex40: -- --
justcmon: -- --
Hero: 9c Th
snowman3: -- --
Western Star: -- --
crackedAAces: -- --
Pre-flop:

Western Star folds. crackedAAces raises to 900.
smokewazhere folds. yarmith folds. caltex40
re-raises to 3000. justcmon folds. Hero folds.
snowman3 folds. crackedAAces re-raises to 5100.
caltex40 goes all-in for 5740. crackedAAces calls.

Tournament all-in showdown -- players show:

caltex40 shows Qh Qs.
crackedAAces shows 7s 7h.

Flop (board: 6d 2h 2s):

(no action in this round)

Turn (board: 6d 2h 2s Qc):

(no action in this round)

River (board: 6d 2h 2s Qc Ts):

(no action in this round)


Showdown:

caltex40 has Qh Qs 2h 2s Qc: full house, queens full of deuces.
crackedAAces has 7s 7h 2h 2s Qc: two pair, sevens and deuces.

Hand #7704029-97 Summary:

No rake is taken for this hand.
caltex40 wins 11780 with full house, queens full of deuces.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Whats up with that?
 
JediQuest

JediQuest

Enthusiast
In every forum theres always the rigged post.I get so sick and tired of hearing this, its poker sh*t happens. I wish these post would get deleted as soon as there posted.
 
jeterkid925

jeterkid925

Guest
JediQuest said:
In every forum theres always the rigged post.I get so sick and tired of hearing this, its poker sh*t happens. I wish these post would get deleted as soon as there posted.
in every forum their are people who just postso they could get in the freeroll, and I hate that.
 
twizzybop

twizzybop

Legend
Now to put a spin on the rigged theory and it deals a million more hands online theory...

There are two types of bad beats:

BAD BEAT #1...

When you catch a monster hand but lose to a BIGGER
monster hand.

For example, let's say you're holding pocket Aces
and the flop hits A-6-6. That means you've got a
full house.

Your opponent goes ALL-IN... and you call. You
think your Aces are the best hand but they're NOT,
because your opponent has pocket sixes, which
gives him the four-of-a-kind.

BAD BEAT #2...

When YOU have the best hand and your opponent has
the WORST hand but your opponent GETS LUCKY and
wins the pot.

For example, let's say you have pocket Aces and go
all-in. Your opponent calls with pocket three's.

The flop hits 2-4-5 and the turn card is a 6,
giving your opponent the STRAIGHT and causing you
to lose the hand.

Now that's a bad beat.

And let's face it, the SECOND type of bad beat--
the one where your opponent gets totally LUCKY and
outdraws you-- is the kind of beat that just plain
SUCKS. And pisses you off.

In fact, the second type of bad beat is the kind
you REMEMBER the most too. When someone says, "Hey
man, how did your card game go?", the first thing
that will come out of your mouth will be the story
of that bad beat.

Am I right?

Now here's what's interesting...

MORE BAD BEATS HAPPEN IN online poker THAN IN
"REGULAR" OFFLINE POKER.

Literally, you'll see more bad beats happen in an
online poker game than you'll see at a local cash
game or in a casino.

If you play both online and offline poker, I'm
sure you agree with this statement.

So what's going on here? Why would it be this way?

There are two popular "theories"...

1. Online poker is rigged.

2. There are more hands per hour, therefore it's
an ILLUSION that there are more bad beats.

My opinion is that BOTH of these theories are
WRONG.

Here's why:

First off, I genuinely believe online poker is NOT
rigged. I mean, c'mon... Do you REALLY think these
multi-billion dollar casinos would need to RIG
hands?

They make their money from tournament entry fees
and rakes... and trust me, they're making plenty.

OK, so what about the second theory?

Well, I do agree that there are more hands per
hour in online poker than offline poker. There's
no disputing that.

But I don't think that's a good enough reason...

Because my belief is that there are MORE bad beats
that happen per X number of hands ONLINE than for
offline poker.

For instance, let's say you played 100 hands. And
let's say you caught two really bad beats for
every 100 hands at a casino. That's 2%.

In online poker, you're likely to catch FIVE or
even TEN of those really bad beats per 100 hands.
That's 5-10%.

So the fact that you're seeing MORE hands doesn't
explain the HIGHER PERCENTAGE of bad beats.

Still with me?

OK, so now let me give you MY "theory" about this.

It's not really a theory. Just good old simple
logic, actually.

Here it goes:

The reason there are more bad beats in ONLINE
poker is because the very NATURE of online poker
leads people to PLAY DIFFERENTLY.

The CARDS and ODDS are the same.

It's the PLAYERS that aren't the same.

What I mean is that for online poker, a LARGE
portion of players adopt the style of
LOOSE-AGGRESSIVE.

Translation? Manic.

They act irrationally... play hands they shouldn't
play... and bet way too aggressively for most
given situations.

Why?

Because online poker isn't as "real".

The money isn't as real. I mean, heck... the
casinos give you so much "free" money when you
sign up, how COULD it feel real?

The cards aren't real. The chips aren't real. The
table isn't real. NONE OF THAT STUFF EVEN EXISTS.

All you see when you play online poker are some
silly little animations. And you hear some
"clickity-click" sounds of fake chips.

That's it.

Nothing else.

Period.

And if you LOSE a game, all you have to do is make
three or four mouse clicks and you're INSTANTLY
playing another game.

And hell, you can PLAY ten games at once if you
want!

You can literally play poker against 100 players
AT THE SAME TIME!

It's a different world, my friend.

Now... let's get back to the bad beats.

The FACT that players are LOOSE-AGGRESSIVE is what
leads to the SITUATIONS where bad beats happen.

Here's why:

1. Players bet their draws more or call large bets
with draws or OK hands (i.e. bottom pair).

2. More players are involved in every pot.

3. The pots are bigger, since players are more
aggressive.

When these conditions COMBINE TOGETHER, it creates
an environment where there are a lot of BIG POTS
and bad beats.

It's not that the cards are "rigged".

It's that the betting patterns and playing styles
are DIFFERENT than what you're used to.

And when you combine that with the fact that you
see more hands per hour, it inevitably leads to
seeing a lot more "crazy" hands and bad beats than
in regular poker.

OK, so now the obvious question becomes...

Is there any way to PREVENT bad beats?

The answer is yes and no.

Ultimately, bad beats will occur NO MATTER WHAT if
you're playing good poker. Because to win at
poker, you've got to be willing to take RISKS.

And most risks have a minimum 20% chance or more
of NOT working out in your favor.
 
A

abc

Guest
OC rigged

There is NO reason to believe OC's aren't rigged!

IMHO it's a vague to say, because they make a lot of MONEY!

Why do Mutual Funds, Stockmarkets, Investment Advisers etc. screw the people over.

THEY MAKE A LOT OF MONEY, don't they?

There are also a lot of OC they do not make a lot of MONEY, RIGHT?

They can't get there Poker Rooms going , so is there an opening to get you scewed?

just a thought!
 
Crippler450

Crippler450

Guest
abc said:
There is NO reason to believe OC's aren't rigged!

IMHO it's a vague to say, because they make a lot of MONEY!

Why do Mutual Funds, Stockmarkets, Investment Advisers etc. screw the people over.

THEY MAKE A LOT OF MONEY, don't they?

There are also a lot of OC they do not make a lot of MONEY, RIGHT?

They can't get there Poker Rooms going , so is there an opening to get you scewed?

just a thought!
I dont really agree with this (At least for all but 1 site...but i wont get into that), but i'd rather be on the safe side and assume that they COULD be rigged then put all of my trust in an unregulated site whose sole goal is to make as much money as possible. It never hurts to be cautious.
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
Twizzy, who is posting under your username? Lol, I'm kidding...but why the change of opinion? Nice post.
 
A

abc

Guest
Do I think online poker is rigged!

Like some, I do think online poker is rigged!

I was invited to invest in a ONLINE Sports Book, just opened there doors a few days ago.
One of the Owners is a very good old friend, ( one good reason not to invest )
in the near future he will go Online with a OC and later if it all works out with Online Poker.
This group developed there own Software for the OSB, but will buy the Software for the OC.
One day, I ask him what he thinks about rigged OP and OC!
its easy and possible he respond to me.

One can tell me, why should one go for 1 million when he can make 50 million at the same TIME?

Had almost 3 years ago a BAD BEAT, lost almost 1,5 million U$ in two independent Ponzi Schemes.
There where 6289 investors involved in the first one:
Total loss about 500 - 900 million U$.

The Second involved about 2500 investors and a
Total loss an estimated 200 million.

The funny Part, if there is any: The Second company to close there doors , was called "SAVING UNLIMITED" Owner Luis Milanes a Cuban American operating in Costa Rica.
He owned the Casino Europa in San Jose C.R. to organized the FIRST Poker Tournament's in Central America.

The Poker Players where invited from all over.
Linda Johnson a Journalist covered the event at a Poker Magazine I got a hold on and I read the following :
Players: Howard"Tahoe", Andrew Humberto Brenes, Gus Echeverri, Daniel Negreanu and Scotty Nguyen.
I guess all of you recognize at least some of them!

Why did L. Milanes need to steel all our MONEY?
Casinos are known as Cash Cows, Right?

I did learn one important thing in my life, it is NEVER enough, for certain people!

Please keep believing in Eastern Bunny and Santa.

PS: We have created an Yahoo Group Board, to discus this matter and you want believe me, how much investors after almost 3 years are left, still believing they will eventually get there money back.

CONCLUSION: It is IMPOSSIBLE to convince one, who just can't see it happened, even it just did!

Don't curse me about my English, because its bad and I KNOW this!

Good Luck to all of you!
 
twizzybop

twizzybop

Legend
Never changed my opinion.. still believe that the Royal Flush comes up way to many times. However I also believe that the bad beats come more often based apon there are more players that are the "LOOSE AGGRESIVE" type especially online. Because the feel of the game isn't so "Real" to them.

This part says it all "They act irrationally... play hands they shouldn't
play... and bet way too aggressively for most
given situations."

Now I will admit I took that post directly from an e-mail I was reading. I get a few e-mails about poker, hold-em and what nots. I keep them saved so that I can always have a fresh perspective.

Besides one always needs an open mind to a subject that is neither proven nor disproven.
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
abc
You personally lost 1.5 Million U.S.? Also, can you please provide sources as to the second scheme involving the casino owner and him being involved in the money grab. Not that it has anything relavent to do with online pokers legitimacy, I just would like to read the story. Thanks.
 
X

xdmanx007

Legend
abc kinda says the same thing I have been saying forever. There are people in the world who have no intrest in making money over a long period of time when they can screw you over and make some real fast! Which is why we will never be sure until the US decides to embrace and regulate our beloved industry!
 
A

abc

Guest
Ponzi Scheme

diabloblanco said:
abc
You personally lost 1.5 Million U.S.? Also, can you please provide sources as to the second scheme involving the casino owner and him being involved in the money grab. Not that it has anything relavent to do with online pokers legitimacy, I just would like to read the story. Thanks.

Local casino here
goes virtual on Web


Monday, 7.JUNY 2004


By the A.M. Costa Rica staff
The Casino Europa, located in the Radisson Hotel in San José, has gone online with a Web camera hookup that allows individuals all over the world to gamble via Internet.

Online casinos are not unusual, but this is believed to be the first time that an established casino in Costa Rica has branched out to Internet customers.

The Europa said it is the largest land-based operation in Costa Rica with three separate gambling facilities: Casino Europa, Tropical Casino and the Royal Dutch Casino. All are in San José.

"And now, through the magic of the Internet, Casinos Europa delivers our Costa Rica casino experience to casino players the world over," said the company on its Web page. "CasinoEuropaWebcam.com is a live webcam casino featuring live dealers dealing real cards to real casino players via a live casino webcam! Using real time video streaming, casino players see and hear actual blackjack games, baccarat games, roulette games, Caribbean poker games and sic bo games."

The three casinos were believed to be the property of Luis Milanes, the operation of the defunct Saving Unlimited. Milanes and key associates vanished in November 2002 and left investors holding the bag for an estimated $250 million.

Milanes always said money loaned to him would be used for casino investments and purchases or to build more slot machines. Prospective investors were given tours of the casinos to show them where their money would go.

However, prosecutors investigating the demise of the Savings Unlimited operation have not moved against the operations to recover money for the victims, and the victims have not begun any legal actions to do so.

http://www.amcostarica.com/122104.htm



[size=+2]Savings Unlimited high-interest operation[/size]
[size=+3]Milanes took time to prepare exit, report shows[/size]By the A.M. Costa Rica staff

Savings Unlimited and fugitive financier Luis A. Milanes took in more than $7.4 million during the six months before the firm closed in 2002 from those who now accuse him.

That was one of the findings by judicial investigators who are seeking to put together an accurate summary of the finances of the high-interest firm. A scant 187 persons have filed claims against Milanes, so the amount of money collected is much higher.

Savings Unlimited employees or Milanes himself destroyed much of the company records around Nov. 22, 2002. That was the date Milanes left Costa Rica for Venezuela, according to immigration records. Milanes generally was called "the Cuban" by expats, and his firm was called "the Cubans."

The Sección Delitos Economicos y Financieros put together the financial report that was delivered to Amelia Robinson, the lead prosecutor in the case, last month. At the same time Manuel Roldán Alvarez asked that a judicial order be sought to study a Banco Nacional transaction.

Roldán is head of the money laundering investigative unit of the financial section. He said that just weeks before Milanes left, Savings Unlimited purchased a bank check for nearly $500,000, and investigators need more information to find out where the money went.

The report was prefaced with the warning that a lot of the information sought by investigators, mainly from offshore banks, had not been delivered.

In addition to many local banks, Milanes and Savings Unlimited appear to have used banks in Panamá, the Bahamas, the United States and other locations. Savings Unlimited was in Edificio Colón and distinguished itself with an atmosphere that was more like a bank.

Depositors received computerized statements and did business at teller-like windows. The company paid 3 percent a month or more on deposits of $5,000 or more.

The records compiled by investigators show that in the six months prior to the flight by Milanes some creditors who are now complainants gave the firm as much as $2 million. Other documents show that only about one in every 10 creditors have filed a formal complaint.

The report by the Judicial Investigating Organization unit goes back to the year 2000 and appears to have been compiled using mostly bank records. Milanes had an interest in a number of casinos in the Central Valley as well as the high-interest firm. The list of corporations and bank accounts are extensive.

In addition to Milanes some 11 other people associated with the defunct Saving Unlimited are being investigated, the report said. Another problem for investigators is that Milanes did much of his business in cash. In fact, an employee said in a deposition that the

[size=+2]Luis[/size]
[size=+2](Louis)[/size]
[size=+2]A. [/size]
[size=+2]Milanes[/size]
milanes122104.jpg
[size=-2]INTERPOL file photo[/size]


company maintained a "cash room" where money was easily available.

In discussing several bank accounts, investigators wrote that money from creditors simply was placed in the account and no investments were made with it. This lack of economic activity probably will be used against Milanes in court if he ever is located. He is the object of an international arrest warrant.

Investigators also noted that Savings Unlimited offered a special high-interest rate of 4 percent in the month before Milanes fled. The reason was the company’s "10th anniversary," according to written testimony even though the company was just 4 years old, said the report.

Milanes and his associates told would-be investors that the money would be used to finance his casino holdings. But the report cites a statement from a casino manager who said that, except for small short-term loans, he was unaware of any major investments by Savings Unlimited in casinos.

The report also suggests that the departure by Milanes was planned at least several months in advance. In one case, someone made repeated withdrawals at an automatic teller in the United States to reduce the balance in one bank account here. One day six withdrawals were made at about $500 each, said the report.

The Banco Nacional transaction investigators are studying took place Oct. 15, 2002, about five weeks before Milanes fled.

Expats consistently called Savings Unlimited "the Cubans" because the Villalobos high-interest operation was called "the Brothers." Luis Enrique and Oswaldo Villalobos Camacho ran their business out of Mall San Pedro. Although there were other high-interest operations, Milanes and the Villalobos were considered competitors for expat money. The Villalobos closed down Oct. 14, 2002, and Luis Enrique, too, is an international fugitive. His brother has been charged with fraud and money laundering, among other allegations. There are no indications from the investigative financial report that there was any exchange of money between the two firms. Some expats have claimed the Milanes operation was just another part of the Villalobos enterprise. The report does not show this.

[size=+3]Investors going off in different directions [/size]

The most visible organization of Villalobos investors is out of money but still has expanded to accommodate investors in the defunct Savings Unlimited.

Meanwhile, some members who have charted their own routes to recover their investment money have gone off in other directions.

Yet other more radical investors are pressing to bring suit, perhaps in canada, against President Abel Pacheco because he was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as relating a Bible verse about fools to investors.

A very secretive faction has announced plans to produce an Internet newspaper in Canada that would tell its version of the truth anonymously about the Costa Rica situation.

To some extent, the fragmentation of forces reflects investor frustration with a situation well out of their control. Luis Enrique Villalobos Camacho has not been heard from since mid-October.

He closed his investment operation in Mall San Pedro Oct. 14 and now is considered a fugitive from justice by Costa Rican officials and Interpol, the international police agency. Only some $6 to $7 million of the estimated $1 billion owed by Villalobos has been tracked.

Meanwhile, Louis Milanes, 52, identified as Luis Angel Milanes, has joined Villalobos as one of the international fugitives featured on the Interpol Web site. The former operator of Savings Unlimited is wanted on a fraud charge, said Interpol.

John Manners, one of the leaders of the United Concerned Citizens, Residents & Friends of Costa Rica, said the group will soon expand its steering committee and set up a general meeting as soon as some court action takes place. He also said that Savings Unlimited is a very different case but investors in that firm also need help and many are the same persons who put money with Villalobos. Milanes closed his Paseo Colón investment office and
fled the weekend of Nov. 23. He is believed to owe about $260 million.

J. Duke Moseley is the investor who is starting a different Internet discussion group on the topic. United Concerned Citizens has a discussion list on another Costa Rica Web site, but Moseley said he was unhappy with the metaphysics and unrelated material being discussed there. Plus he said that discussion group soon will shut down due to lack of funds.

He said his list will ask participants to make a clear distinction between rumor and fact. Moseley is known among investors as someone who aggressively checks out facts. He has spent many hours reading the Villalobos case files at the courts. He lost the funds to finish his last year of medical school when Villalobos defaulted Oct. 14. His group will be on Yahoo: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CR_GSG/

Not much is known about those who would press a class action suit against President Pacheco. The idea is to sue Costa Rica officials for being critical of investors. Some sources said that the persons involved tried to get Costa Rica lawyers involved in such a suit, but all declined. Material posted to the Internet under the "classaction" name say a suit is planned in Canada. The Internet posters have never said how Canada would have jurisdiction in a slander suit when the comment was made in Costa Rica and printed by a New York newspaper. The individuals also have not explained how they will surmount governmental immunity and the fact that Pacheco was expressing an opinion that probably is not slander or libel on its face. The U.S. courts have held, for example, that the stronger word "sleazebag" is protected opinion and not libel. Even more secretive are those who are planning an Internet newspaper, Verdad (Spanish for the truth). The organizers will not say who they are and claim in their initial issue that they will be protected against Costa Rican defamation laws because their Internet server would be located elsewhere, probably British Columbia. Everything in the newspaper will be posted without names, they said. They also use a special e-mail account that they believe gives them extra protection from having messages intercepted. This group is critical of existing newspapers.

Some investors seem to be undergoing mood shift
By the A.M. Costa Rica staff
Changes in attitude are taking place among Villalobos investors in Costa Rica. More and more are fed up waiting for the fugitive financier to reappear and are leaning to strong police action.

Postings to a host of Internet discussion lists and individual comments on the street are less and less optimistic that the man, Luis Enrique Villalobos Camacho, will voluntarily return to Costa Rican and distribute the estimated $1 billion he holds in trust for his investors.

Privately, even some very close to the investigation and legal process confess their boredom with lack of a quick resolution to the case.

Villalobos closed up his Mall San Pedro office Oct. 14 and went into hiding. The best guess by police officials is that he is holed up on a heavily protected ranch in Nicaragua, although no one here knows for sure.

An effort to hire a lawyer by the United Concerned Citizens & Residents of Costa Rica has not reached its goal of $100,000. And no announcement has been made of a firm deal between the group and José Miguel Villalobos Umaña, the lawyer. The group had said it would sign an agreement this week, but others say the organization has not raised enough money to meet the demands of the lawyer.

The group wants to bring criminal and civil action against key members of the Costa Rican government and the judiciary in order to speed the investigation along. The group believes officially that Villalobos is innocent of wrongdoing and has been persecuted by bureaucrats working at the urgings of jealous bankers.

But as time goes on, more and more of the estimated 6,400 investors question exactly how Villalobos was able to pay up to 3 percent per month that he gave his investors. The manner of his business was supposed to be a secret, but some key judicial officials quickly agree that money laundering is the strong charge that Villalobos will face, that and a charge of fraud for what investigators say was a ponzi scheme in which investors were paid from their own principal in order to attract more investors.

However, a charge of illegal financial intermediation (being a broker) is likely to fail because investigators can’t seem to find how Villalobos was working as an intermediary. There does not seem to have been other parties borrowing the money, and this would be necessary for an intermediation charge to stick. That is the most minor of all the charges, and failure to prosecute on this charge actually would lend support to allegations of money laundering.

Villalobos has not been charged with anything, although an arrest warrant has been issued based on allegations of fraud and money laundering. In
Costa Rica, the charging process comes at the end of the investigation, which still is going on.
Some Villalobos investors were encouraged when investigators detained José Victor Poo, who had been hiding out in Panamá. Poo is a close associate of Luis Milanes, operator of Savings Unlimited, another high-interest operation that failed in late November when Milanes left the country with Poo. Some investors had money in both operations. Milanes may have taken as much as $260 million. He still is at large.

But if Poo could be run down and captured, there is hope for the arrest of the other fugitive financiers, the investors reason. And more are seeing the arrest and return of Villalobos as the best route for getting at least some of their money returned.

A judge ordered Poo held Friday for four months of preventative detention while agents continue to investigate the Savings Unlimited disaster. Naturally, they will want to ask him if he knows the whereabouts of Milanes.

Another Villalobos group headed by Canadians is seeking to raise money to seek international arbitration under a treaty that was designed to protect investors from predatory governments. Even though some may agree with the spirit of the group, investors are becoming a hard group from which to solicit money.

The Canadians want to hold Costa Rica’s feet to the fire for failing to exercise oversight of the Villalobos investment operations. However, many of the investors were outraged when The Tico Times published stories about efforts by an elderly investor to recover his money from Villalobos in 2001. A similar reaction probably would have greeted any government effort to intervene in the highly informal investment relationship between Villalobos and his predominately North American clientele.

Despite the defections of some investors, a hardcore handful is keeping the faith. And faith it is because the Villalobos investment operation was closely tied to Christianity. He sprinkled biblical terms in his written messages and was a solid member of the International Baptist Church from which he recruited investors.

One couple this week said they attributed a miraculous healing of the husband two years ago to the fact that Villalobos agreed to pray for the man after he was badly burned. They are unshaken in their belief that Villalobos will return to distribute all the money he has in trust.

Others call this anticipated return of the financier "the second coming," a clear reference to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in Christian theology.

Meanwhile, investigators are keeping a close eye on the comings and goings of Villalobos family members on the assumption that one or more are in contact with him.


Our reward offer is still $500

Louis Milanes
Luis Enrique Villalobos Camacho
By the A.M. Costa Rica staff
This newspaper seeks the prompt return of two men who ran high-interest investment operations that have gone out of business.

Luis Enrique Villalobos Camacho, 62, was associated with Ofinter S.A., a money exchange house, and with his own private investment business that had about $1 billion in other people’s money on the books.

Villalobos closed his business Oct. 14 and vanished.

Louis Milanes operated Savings Unlimited and several casinos in San José. He left the country with other members of his firm the weekend of Nov. 23. He may have as much as $260 million in his possession. Both operations catered to North Americans.
Villalobos had about 6,300 customers. Milanes had about 2,400.
Villalobos and Milanes are the subjects of international arrest warrants. Associates of both men have been jailed.

A.M. Costa Rica has posted a $500 reward for information leading to the detention of either man with the hopes that others will make similar pledges. The newspaper believes that investors only will see some of their money when the two men are in custody.

Milanes has few supporters in San José. On the other hand, as the letters frequently on this page show, Villalobos still has supporters who believe that he will reappear and settle his debts. They believe he is in hiding because of a predatory Costa Rican government.
 
Last edited:
M

Mixter X

Guest
well, although it took me a while to read all the information i'm scared!
things like this i hear about but never read into the details.
i'm sorry you got stung!
 
A

abc

Guest
Stung

Mixter X said:
well, although it took me a while to read all the information i'm scared!
things like this i hear about but never read into the details.
i'm sorry you got stung!
It isn't only the money, but psychologically damage, is often much greater.
Thus be careful when you lose your money Online, because you do not only ruin your own bank account, but often the lives around you, too!

This has nothing to do, with the issue, "are OC rigged" just in general, be responsible!
Luck
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
Exactly, that whole thing had nothing to do with online poker being rigged, which is precisely why I asked for links to the information. ABC got burned on some business ventures and one of the culprits happened to be a casino owner. Sucks for him and all that, but it doesn't prove anything in relation to online pokers validity. Neither do all the other posts he's made about them being rigged. Can it be done? Of course. Is it done? That has yet to be proven. And until its is proven, then the people that think it is rigged have the responsibility to validate their claims with factual evidence supporting them, not the other way around. Why should the majority of people--those that believe online poker is on the up and up--have to prove that the minority of tinfiol hatters are wrong, when they have yet to ever provide even a shred of real evidence that they're right? Think about it.
 
H

HughHefner

Guest
what i dont get is why would online poker be rigged in the first place? you dont think a CASINO can make money without cheating? come on...we all know casinos are the winners no matter what. they rake the pots...they get money...they dont gamble...they have NO reason to cheat. ive heard crackpot 'make the cards so pots are bigger for a bigger rake' theory...doesnt hold up! why? because if they did it, they may get caught, and that IS a gamble. Casinos DO NOT GAMBLE. they win....so there is no reasont hey would ever be cheating.
 
A

abc

Guest
rigged?

diabloblanco said:
Exactly, that whole thing had nothing to do with online poker being rigged, which is precisely why I asked for links to the information. ABC got burned on some business ventures and one of the culprits happened to be a casino owner. Sucks for him and all that, but it doesn't prove anything in relation to online pokers validity. Neither do all the other posts he's made about them being rigged. Can it be done? Of course. Is it done? That has yet to be proven. And until its is proven, then the people that think it is rigged have the responsibility to validate their claims with factual evidence supporting them, not the other way around. Why should the majority of people--those that believe online poker is on the up and up--have to prove that the minority of tinfiol hatters are wrong, when they have yet to ever provide even a shred of real evidence that they're right? Think about it.
Ok I understand, why do Market Analyst have to cheat?
why do CFO, CEO have to cheat?
why do Casinos get caught because they cheat?
why do OC cheat, oh sorry they all don't because you didn't realize it yet?
why did ENRON cheat,
why did WorldCom cheat,
why did internet IPO's cheat
why do banks cheat
why do politician cheat
why did Michel Milken cheat
why did Dennis Kozlowski cheat

why should OC's cheat
because................
even my story doesn't particularly have to do with OC, but did have to do with GREED!
But like I already mentioned, most of you wouldn't admit even they know.
In the Villalobos case, there are still thousands believe he will come back and pay them/us!
get a grip!
I am not here to educate you nor to tell you what to do, I just like to make you aware about , what is a real possibility!
I have no doubts that OC cheat, no doubts at all!
But you are free to feel, all this are only BAD BEATS!
Don't mind!

BTW: why should they not cheat, if yours dont believe they would in first place.
Thus no risk!
 
Last edited:
Crippler450

Crippler450

Guest
diabloblanco said:
it doesn't prove anything in relation to online pokers validity. Neither do all the other posts he's made about them being rigged. Can it be done? Of course. Is it done? That has yet to be proven. And until its is proven, then the people that think it is rigged have the responsibility to validate their claims with factual evidence supporting them, not the other way around. Why should the majority of people--those that believe online poker is on the up and up--have to prove that the minority of tinfiol hatters are wrong, when they have yet to ever provide even a shred of real evidence that they're right? Think about it.
I think there is just as much responsibility to 'prove' that online sites are legit as there is to 'prove' that they may be rigged. After all, if someone who can comprehend the mere chance that even one of the unregulated (yep, no laws protecting us) online poker sites may by some chance be rigged is WRONG (meaning they are all completely legit) then what would the result be? Nothing would change, and nobody would be hurt! On the other hand, if people who are always so quick to defend every single site on the net without even questioning them or presenting the possiblilty of profitible foul play on their part are WRONG (meaning one or some end up being 'rigged' in some way) then a LOT of players could be out of a LOT of money.

My point? It doesnt hurt to be cautious, and someone shuldn't have to present evidence saying that it is 100% definately rigged for there to be doubt. By not even entertaining the possiblility of foul play, it seems very ignorant, especially since you are handing these sites your hard earned money every day. Obviously, nothing is going to change the opinion of someone so close-minded, so I wont waste any more of my time on the subject. But to everyone else, online poker is most likely NOT rigged, but at least have the mental capability to see that there is a chance you will at some point in time come across a site that could cheat you out of your money, so be careful!
 
robwhufc

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite
My advice would be to keep to the big, well known sites or those owned by established UK bookmakers. Stay away from companies with no players, new start ups and companies with seemingly overly generous bonus offers.
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
Crippler
You insult my intelligence constantly in your post yet I have never directly singled you out on this site ever. Frankly you weren't even an afterthought until you took it upon yourself in the above to speak about my intellect or close-mindedness which you know nothing about either, so who does that make ignorant? Grab a dictionary if you need one.

I have a difference of opinion than you, obviously, but I have never personally attacked you regarding this. You are obviously have a bit of a complex that you should probably go seek some professional help to get over. Inferiority maybe?

This topic has been debated ad-nauseum on every single poker forum on the web and NOBODY has EVER provided EVEN ONE shred of evidence that online poker is rigged. That should tell you something, but I am not surprised by your obvious lack of rational thought.

Here's the part that I don't get; you aregue with me about my post and call me inflamitory names and make derogitory statements, yet you don't even have a solid side of the argument upon which you rest. You claim that online poker isn't rigged, but that people should be cautious. What is there to be cautious about if it isn't rigged? And if they should truly be cautious, doesn't that imply that the odds of online gaming being are fairly good and your ascertation that it isn't is actually probably not true? You're a walking contradiction and the kind of person who doesn't have the testicular fortitude to form an opinion. You would rather ride the fence and mock others until a veridct is in then claim you were right the entire time. At the bare minimum if you plan on berating someones opinion, which is widely recognized and accepted as fact, you should have an opinion of your own. Not some mealy-mouthed, half-assed, psuedo opinion. Get a clue.

If you, or anyone else for that matter, thinks online poker is rigged or juiced or whatever the conspiriacy du-jour is then you are truly the ignorant ones for continuing to play and put your cash at risk in an environment that you *may* possibly have no skilled control over.

I am actually glad you're done with this argument and trying to convince a close-minded ignoramous like myself that you're right and I'm wrong (without the slightest bit of fact to support your claim), because I don't really want to be bothered by your posts anyway. However, I suspect that you aren't done at all and that you will continue on your crusade of not having an opinion one way or the other. Damn, that sounds really pointless when you say it out loud, try it.

BTW Rob
Sage advice. Sketchy things can happen with businesses that have yet to be established financially. Such as the situation with Dutch Boyd and Pokerspot. However, just to add to that, even the smallest of sites have yet to be proven cheaters in any way. I would be more concerned with their financial situation before I would their juicing flops, or action hands or whatever else. But good point.

abc said:
Ok I understand, why do Market Analyst have to cheat?
why do CFO, CEO have to cheat?
why do Casinos get caught because they cheat?
why do OC cheat, oh sorry they all don't because you didn't realize it yet?
why did ENRON cheat,
why did WorldCom cheat,
why did internet IPO's cheat
why do banks cheat
why do politician cheat
why did Michel Milken cheat
why did Dennis Kozlowski cheat

why should OC's cheat
because................
even my story doesn't particularly have to do with OC, but did have to do with GREED!
But like I already mentioned, most of you wouldn't admit even they know.
In the Villalobos case, there are still thousands believe he will come back and pay them/us!
get a grip!
I am not here to educate you nor to tell you what to do, I just like to make you aware about , what is a real possibility!
I have no doubts that OC cheat, no doubts at all!
But you are free to feel, all this are only BAD BEATS!
Don't mind!

BTW: why should they not cheat, if yours dont believe they would in first place.
Thus no risk!
OK, in order:
1.) What the hell do any of the aforementioned incidents or people have to do with online poker? Did Enron or Worldcom own an online poker site that I don't know about?
2.) You say you have NO doubs that online cardrooms cheat. OK, fair enough, you have no doubts. There's also one more thing you Don't HAVE, and that's proof that they DO.
3.) And to address your final question, yes there is a risk for online cardrooms cheating and its a very simple one to explain; people like you. There are hundreds of conspiriacy theorists out there salivating and frothing at the mouth for any single shred of evidence that a cardroom is cheating so that they can latch onto it like a rabid dog and wave it in everyones face with a big, "see, see, we told you, we told you it was fixed all along." However, you haven't gotten it yet. You're still waiting. So am I. Good day, sir.

P.S.--Crippler, I just saw your avatar for the very first time as I normally have images turned off so that pages load faster, and I am literally laughing out loud. I just had my intellect impuned by someone who watches rasslin'. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...thanks for the laugh...I really needed that.
 
Last edited:
M

Mopar384

Guest
DUH!

What he is trying to say - is that people cheat because they CAN. Not because they need the money. Oil companies could retire right now, but they'll never have enough money. Its a fact that people who want to be rich in order to have money to spend, don't get rich. Its the people that pinch pennies now AND afterwards who are millionaires. GREED!:deal: They even did a story about it on tv.
 
Last edited:
M

Mopar384

Guest
Re: Bad beats

Yes, I believe its true that online poker sites like to create controversy by giving many people pocket pairs at once. I have seen as many as four people with pocket pairs in the same hand. I was beaten while holding Aces full of kings (pocket pair Aces), by a pocket pair of kings (four Kings). I have quit playing some sites because it happens WAY too much there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top