ITT: Global Poker Slips Up: BIG SECRET REVEALED! (CONFIRMED x3)

You think Global is rigging their games and the lowest level customer service guy both knows about it and also let you in on the secret?

I think they are obligated to say what their script says, and I think their script is telling you exactly what's occurring.

'ALL GLOBAL POKER GAMES USE RNG AND RTP.'

Not 'SOME'. Not 'SLOTS USE RTP'. 'ALL GLOBAL POKER GAMES USE RNG AND RTP.'

You make a valid point; but it's hinged on the answer coming from the employee; the employee is given a script that tells them what they must say.

Now if poker is a skilled game; it's not a sweepstakes. Sweepstakes by definition are luck based.

If they apply RTP to poker tables; suddenly it 100% qualifies as a sweepstakes. They can not be considered a sweepstakes if you can use skill; legally.

You're assuming they're lying to the law; and I'm telling you they're not lying to be in compliance with the law. They've applied RTP to their poker tables.

------------------------------------------

You can look at this two ways.

1.) They speak in riddles to avoid not being in compliance with law, and are pretending to be legally compliant.

2.) Their riddles aren't riddles. They are telling you exactly what's occurring.

--------------------------------------------------------------

A sweepstakes is a free-to-play promotion where prizes are awarded to randomly selected winners. It is considered a pure game of chance compared to other forms of promotions that are skill-based.

A contest is a game of skill where entrants have to demonstrate some effort or skill. Winners are selected based on the merit of their entry.

The winner in a lottery contest is randomly selected based on chance. However, instead of free-play like sweepstakes, participants have to pay an entry fee or make a purchase to join a lottery game.

Each form of promotion has varying official rules, legal requirements, and specific benefits that must be considered by operators before they’re launched.

I also don't think they are 'letting me in on a secret'. I think if you email them, they'll send you the same response.

"I think they are obligated to say what their script says, and I think their script is telling you exactly what's occurring."

So you think they're rigging their poker games and providing a script to their lowest level employees mandating they reveal the rig if asked.

Global Poker players believe GP is misleading regulators to stay compliant as a sweepstakes.

What I'm suggesting is that GP is misleading the players.

I am not suggesting the support is in the know any more than you or I.

I am suggesting that the script clues the players in as to the truth.

Global poker is not misleading regulators to stay open. They are misleading the player base who overwhelmingly thinks it's just legalese wording to 'seem compliant'.

I think I'm having trouble expressing why this is important, but I'm hoping it clicks for some of you. Especially those who have read through their various threads. That's who will understand this the most easily.

What I want to clarify is this surely means that this new WPT gold site offering sweepstakes must be doing the same thing, correct?

As for why you can post, it's obvious.

I honestly couldn't tell you @Mark Davis.

Outside looking in perspective?

Depends entirely on if the company understand US sweepstakes law or not, the risks they are willing to take, and any protection they may have with hush money.

My devilish charm and receding hairline?

Explain how RTP could be used

I don't have access to their systems, so I can't say exactly how they'd implement RTP in poker. But theoretically, RTP could be applied in various ways—maybe through adjusting the odds on certain hands, controlling the frequency of specific outcomes, or other methods that make poker more aligned with games of chance rather than skill.

There’s a lot of speculation around how it could work, but the important part is that the very idea of RTP being applied to poker changes how the game is viewed, legally and strategically.

RTP is a value, guys.
If they say that RTP is applicable to poker tables a good question: "What is the RTP value for SnG tournaments 10$?". It's interesting what they answer.

In fact, if they mean that RTP = 100% - room's commission (according to assumption that all the players are equal). Then RTP on 10$ SnGs with the room's commission = 0, 9$ (just an example), will be 91%, right?

So, Lucy's Fur, would be interesting to hear their clear answer on the RTP value of any SnG tournament.

Yes, if they talk about RTP in poker, they automatically admit, that software equalize all the players in the room (irrespective of their level of playing - profitable/unprofitable decisions). So on a distance all the players RTP = 100% - room's commission. But if you come to a court with this, they will just explain some terminology stuff. I'm sure, they understand what is legal to say, and what is not... Their response sounds really strange though... RTP is not applicable to poker.

Id bet the RTP for any cash game pot is the % of the pot not raked and the RTP for any tourney is going to be the % of the buyin that goes to the prize pool.

@Ledn

I mean, we're all left to speculate and I think you should at least hear me out.

1.) They are using the phrase RTP to trick regulators into thinking it's luck based, not skill based. (Putting their entire business in jeopardy)

2.) They are actually using RTP and are compliant with regulations by forcing 'luck'. (Allowing users to *think* the scam is on regulators)

So while we can argue back and forth about what RTP means, if you look at the broader picture and how it relates to sweepstakes law, isn't it much more likely they've simply included a system within their software to ensure compliance? The alternative by default is - They are not complying with sweepstakes law, and are 'tricking' regulators.

Poker has been deemed a skill game. Sweepstakes are not skill-based, they are luck-based. By offering skill-based games, they'd throw their entire operation into question by regulators.

What's more likely, that the wording they use is to trick regulators; or they are telling us exactly what they are doing?

I mean unless you see an alternative that I do not see; there are two choices. Misleading regulators -> Misleading Players. To be completely fair; they're not even misleading players, they are telling you it's not real poker in every single statement they make, and it's us who says 'It's real poker, they are lying to regulators'.

I think even if you disagree with me, I have a point that is further backed by their statements and behavior (like disallowing HH).

Plus; you must admit; your given definition of RTP is not what RTP means, and is a huge stretch. Is that reasonable to say? Don't you consider that definition a stretch as to what RTP is by definition?

Well, LF, they still say that they use RNG to provide fair game. So, if they implement additional algorithms to make all the players equal - they broke the law. So, who cares. We just need to know the algorithm, and just describe it, so any newcomer could just come and test this. Just to ensure that the game is not really a poker game, just a sequence of prescribed situations.

Have you called the police?

No proofs - no crime, man! It's too early to call there! )))

To be clear; no crime would be being committed on their part.

It's what makes it legal in relation to sweepstakes law.

They take rake.

$11 buyin
$1 goes to global
$10 goes to the prize pool
90.9% RTP

Duh

RTP is the amount of the tournament pool that returns to the players.

If it’s a 99 SC tournament and 90 SC goes to the pool, the RTP is 90.9%.

And how does that apply to Ring Games? (Cash Games)

There is no RTP in poker guys. It's not logical to jump through the hoops you guys are jumping through to justify RTP in poker. It's not a thing. RTP is for slots.

While I understand the reasoning behind your definition of RTP as the percentage of the buy-in that goes toward the prize pool, I think this is a bit of a stretch in this context.

In typical gambling or gaming terminology, RTP refers to the percentage of total wagers returned to players over time—not just the allocation of a buy-in. If they were solely referring to rake or prize pool distribution, why use the term 'RTP, ' which carries a very specific meaning in the gambling world?

1.) Standard Definition of RTP: RTP (Return to Player) is widely understood as the percentage of total wagers returned to players over time based on game outcomes, not simply how much of a buy-in goes to the prize pool.

2.) Relevance to Poker: In poker, there is no inherent "RTP" because the game is player-versus-player (PvP). The outcomes are determined by skill and chance, with the house only taking a rake. Applying RTP in this context would suggest interference in outcomes.

3.) Why Would Global Use the Term?: If Global Poker explicitly says, "All games use RNG and RTP, " it's unlikely they are referring to the percentage of the buy-in going to the pool. That phrasing would mislead players and regulators, as RTP has a well-defined meaning that implies payout control.

They, very obviously, mean their casino games in their 1st response.

They have one regulator, Malta Gaming Commission. I have no clue about Malta gaming but I would be near certain that Global is air tight legally with them.

As far as them operating in an unregulated market like the US. There is going to be grey areas in how to interpret the law and until they face a lawsuit, its going to remain a grey area.

I think the major grey area they are exploiting is whether poker is considered a skill game or a luck game, with regards to US Sweepstakes law. There is no doubt that over the long term, skill is the major factor for winning, but also there is little doubt for any single hand of poker, luck is the major factor for winning.

PS. Not a lawyer and might/probably be spewing legal nonsense.

@LEDN

Your argument thus turns into...

"They are following Malta Gaming Commission rules; not USA law."

You must obey the law where you operate/exist. I can't gift marijuana in Idaho even though in NY it's legal to gift people marijuana.

MGA’s oversight typically doesn’t directly translate to compliance with U.S. sweepstakes laws since the U.S. market is unique and operates outside MGA jurisdiction.

U.S. law tends to look at games as a whole, not individual moments (e.g., a single hand). Claiming poker as luck-based by focusing only on short-term outcomes could open GP to legal challenges if regulators or courts apply a broader view.

Poker ruled game of skill LEGALLY.

Texas has also ruled it a game of skill. The ruling in NY was federal judge making the ruling.

This sets a legal precedent that could undermine any argument attempting to classify poker as predominantly luck-based in order to align with U.S. sweepstakes law.

I've only passed the practice bar, and not the actual bar though. (Tested myself when I sued a local PD and won). A lawyer who specialized in sweepstakes law would have more insight.

NGL seeing OP's post in Global poker discussion thread was very distressing if the images are authentic. If I understand correctly, return to player or RTP is commonly associated with slot machines. It is a mandate from the gambling Authority that a certain percentage of the money played must be returned to the players.

In the case of global poker, it doesn't matter if the RTP is self imposed, required by the gaming Authority where Global poker is headquartered, or is used to comply with whatever sweepstakes laws there are in the United States. The issue is how RTP affects gameplay.

Lets use slot machines as an example. Let's say the casino must meet the return to player percentage requirements every quarter. So we are two months and two weeks into the quarter. And the actual payouts to date are much lower than what the RTP requirement is. So using an algorithm or other mathematical means, the casino adjust the slot machines. The slot machines give bigger payouts and or pay out at a greater frequency until the return to player percentage requirement is meant.

Conversely let's say that the payouts up-to-date are much higher than the requirement of the return to player percentage. Then the casino could tighten the slot machines so that they pay out less and or at a less frequency and still meet the requirements for the return to player percentage with an additional amount for error.

So so with global poker RTP could be accomplished with winning players subsidizing the RTP to losing players. So all of those times your EV is 80%, but your actual realization is less; RTP is the cause.

It is certainly possible to comply with a Return to Player Percentage requirement during the course of normal game play. It is also certain that many times complying with RTP requires manipulating the outcome.

TLDR: If Global Poker has RTP for poker games then the outcome of hands is often artificial and not the result of a randomly generated digital deck of cards.

EDIT: The date of the original response from Global is November 2022. Global didn't institute rake back until mid 2023. Proof that this wasn't merely a poor choice of words to describe rake back

"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence."

This is almost certainly a case of a customer service rep not understanding the difference between RNG and RTP or how they apply to different casino games.

To a layperson, it's easy to just say, "Yep, we use random thingamajigs in our poker games" without any real grasp of what those thingamajigs actually do.

That said, Global's track record on game integrity is abysmal. The Project Baby scandal alone should make anyone think twice about trusting them. But I highly doubt the game is rigged in the way you guys are implying.

@LEDN (Found this and thought you specifically may find it interesting)

The following is from the patent office relating to specifically Global Pokers Patent.

(US 10, 580, 256 B2) <- Patent Number

Within their own patent they state sweepstakes must be luck based, not skill based.

I'm still reading through the full patent, but this part struck me as particularly telling.