Z
- Status
NoWuckingFurries
Legend
It's really unlucky, but it points to variance not cheating.
The point here that you seem to be missing (a bit like Admiral Nelson holding the telescope up to his eye patch, probably) is that there are a lot of online grinders that multi-table and play for hours a day, and spend a lot of time analysing the hands that they have played. You can be 100% sure that if any site was coming up with results that were not 100% kosher it would be all over the internet like wildfire.
B
bRiMaTiOn
Enthusiast
They're probably waiting to make it to 100,000 hands! Bwahahahaha
Anyways, most players get knocked off from frustration, the ones who do make it to this reasonable number are just the lucky ones who get decent odds and if they see something crazy, it evened out for them oh... like 3 months later then it was suppose to so it was cool. Everyone else gets reimbursed by the site if they point it out so there is no gigantic uproar.
Also there is a percentage of people who are spreading it like wildfire and then people like you give them your "3 points of logic" rebuttal, call them the "'poker is rigged' crowd" and then declare everything is variance.
Anyways, most players get knocked off from frustration, the ones who do make it to this reasonable number are just the lucky ones who get decent odds and if they see something crazy, it evened out for them oh... like 3 months later then it was suppose to so it was cool. Everyone else gets reimbursed by the site if they point it out so there is no gigantic uproar.
Also there is a percentage of people who are spreading it like wildfire and then people like you give them your "3 points of logic" rebuttal, call them the "'poker is rigged' crowd" and then declare everything is variance.
NoWuckingFurries
Legend
Except that only happens in your imagination.
I can think of at least three examples where the vigilance of regular players has exposed problems at sites and stopped them from getting out of hand. There is a big difference between regular players who play a significant number of hands per week coming up with statistical analysis to back up claims, and the tin foil hat brigade being on some loony crusade against imaginary rigging.
Here is one of the three examples I mentioned, of people producing what they consider to be statistical evidence and asking a site to investigate:
http://www.pokertableratings.com/blog/2010/07/bot-ring-discovered-on-poker-stars/
slycbnew
Cardschat Elite
You appear to be unaware of the more prominent scandals in the last few years and the role of users in exposing the scandals, largely through statistical analysis of hand histories. Rather than continuing posting uninformed opinions, why don't you use an online search engine to look for those scandals. NoWuckingFurries has already pointed you to one such scandal, try also looking for "potripper" and "stoxtrader". The potripper scandal will give you an example of an "inside job", i.e. employees of the site, the others are examples of users abusing the system.
B
bRiMaTiOn
Enthusiast
No I get TV around here. I've seen the scandals. So you can send in statistics if you suspect cheating. There have been returns of money for software failure. I brought it up in the first place the fact that you can use statistics to get money back in cases of unfair games.
First posts at Cardschat and I get the weirdos...
First posts at Cardschat and I get the weirdos...
L
lolrobertlol
Enthusiast
I think there is more bad bet there at live games.
I like online poker! lol
I like online poker! lol
lektrikguy
Legend
FYP. And write to PS or FT with your "evidence" and post the reply you get. I'll be waiting.
DaveE
Solvem probler
Project Moderator
Hi
another weirdo here:hello: Maybe you're trying to be helpful, but you are the one that needs an education in pokersite policies.
E
Eclipsenz
Rock Star
to an extent hes right I don't agree with needing to go all in preflop, honestly a large bet of say 3-400 if there were 3-4 limper in the pot should do it, you should still get at least one fish wanting to call ya.
But yeah I've already worked this out but its no where near as easy as he makes it out to be...
Its annoying when you do a big raise someone calls with like 6-10 flop comes 2,2,10, he thinks his top pair is good, you have aces he goes all in, you call and catches a 6 on the river,
stupid play gets rewarded far too much, its ridiculous
But yeah I've already worked this out but its no where near as easy as he makes it out to be...
Its annoying when you do a big raise someone calls with like 6-10 flop comes 2,2,10, he thinks his top pair is good, you have aces he goes all in, you call and catches a 6 on the river,
stupid play gets rewarded far too much, its ridiculous
fletchdad
Jammin................
Loyaler
fletchdad
Jammin................
Loyaler
Didnt you say if you lost 10 hands in a row that you should have won, you get money back? Or something like that, if I remember. Like if you email support cause of bad beats, they let you start winning so you dont make an uproar? Something like that wasnt it? Players reporting suspected bots and collusion and evidence or insider cheating and irrational stats due to possible unfair play is a different ballgame (cardgame) wouldnt you say? And the money back is payed to players who lost money to collusion or inside cheating, not paid to players who took bad beats.
OMG, I am keeping this thread alive.
In before the merge.....................................................
fletchdad
Jammin................
Loyaler
You are probably posting in the quick reply box. Thats the one in the thread. If you click (always underneath the last post to the left) "Post Reply" you get smilys and other stuff underneath the text box.
:icon_prof:s::willy: and so on....
fletchdad
Jammin................
Loyaler
I am not sure I know what you are trying to say here, but it made me laugh anyway.
And dont be put off by players answers. Some will be sarcastic when the topic goes to site rigging, go here https://www.cardschat.com/forum/pok...ed-roads-lead-228298/index63.html#post1206179
and you will get a clearer picture why. (or not)
But no one is being intentionally mean, but the rigged topic makes many face palm, and the answers they type reflect this.
Last edited by a moderator:
B
bRiMaTiOn
Enthusiast
Ten hands that are way off base are the first signs of cheating. All your "something like that"'s lead to what I actually said. It wasn't bad beats. It wasn't unfair rewards for common variance. Is anyone here going to ask what the significance of ten mathmatically wrong hands is again?
Not cherry-picked hands. Ten hands in a row of All-ins. Important areas of sound game plans. Big Pots. They are signs of corrupt software.
We're discussing how bad beats may be corrupt software. Not rigged. If it was rigged I wouldn't be so positive about sending it in to support. It could be the reason for more bad beats. I listened to that guy's theory that since you played more hands you saw more bad beat's didn't I?
Finding flaws MAY take more then 10 hands. It can be done in 10 hands. Don't give me a reason why it cannot be done in 10 hands. IT CAN BE DONE IN 10 HANDS.
52 cards are distributed at random amongst 10 people two at a time and then 7 cards are placed on a board. There is an interest that the cards do not create "unrandom poker situations". Out of all the mathmatical possibilites in existance only a fraction pertain to the events of the game and are watched.
I don't know man. Maybe it can be done in ten hands.
Also I'm Isildur so I don't know why everyone thinks I'm leaving this thread.
Not cherry-picked hands. Ten hands in a row of All-ins. Important areas of sound game plans. Big Pots. They are signs of corrupt software.
We're discussing how bad beats may be corrupt software. Not rigged. If it was rigged I wouldn't be so positive about sending it in to support. It could be the reason for more bad beats. I listened to that guy's theory that since you played more hands you saw more bad beat's didn't I?
Finding flaws MAY take more then 10 hands. It can be done in 10 hands. Don't give me a reason why it cannot be done in 10 hands. IT CAN BE DONE IN 10 HANDS.
52 cards are distributed at random amongst 10 people two at a time and then 7 cards are placed on a board. There is an interest that the cards do not create "unrandom poker situations". Out of all the mathmatical possibilites in existance only a fraction pertain to the events of the game and are watched.
I don't know man. Maybe it can be done in ten hands.
Also I'm Isildur so I don't know why everyone thinks I'm leaving this thread.
- Status