The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition
Bad beats are part of the game. I understand that. But after absorbing more than my fair share on Poker Stars I switched
As someone who does not question poker sites, there would be no reason for you to see the statement that it is not technically possible.
As someone who does, this is their go to opening line. The second being it would not financially benefit them.
Poker sites number one concern for profit is site traffic. It simply would not be good enough to rely on regs as you suggest. Casual players make up the most traffic on any given day, of course it would be in their interests to protect these, the regs are already there to stay.
This is why we see the fines! Marketing encouraging those who have stopped playing or have not played much recently …not the regs. Why have multi million fines on players who dont matter?
Clearly these are the players who they need.
At the end of the day you can talk tech all you like. The facts are it is mistrusted, they blatantly lie in the defence of it, regulation is not anything like the level it should be and there is nothing that exists that someone can prove it’s not right.
Put that together with the constant fines in their treatment of certain categories of vulnerable players and then decide if you can fully trust their integrity enough to make excuses for what you see far too often.
You know the facts point to that they can’t be trusted, so you should always trust your gut instinct instead of making excuses for those who really dont deserve any loyalty from you.
All you are achieving is delaying change.
But I quoted chatGPT to prove you wrong many times and you ignore it. You read more selectively than anybody else.Even now, you say its all software but you also quote that the "rng draws bytes from the openssl rng."I have referenced this section many times, you say i havent but thats because theres a plate in your head where your eyesight should be:"The OpenSSL RNG seeds itsel
And what you reference doesn't say what you claim.
Fact, they say they tested the Poker RNG.
Fact, they described the components of the Poker RNG and it did not include the sources on entropy.
If they tested the sources of entropy they would have described the hardware they tested (like they described the Poker RNG). They did not.
Similarly, they also mention the Poker RNG uses a separate RNG to randomize cycling. And even though the Poker RNG uses inputs from the second RNG they state it is a separate RNG, just like the sources of entropy.
3.1.2 Cycling
The Poker RNG is cycled continuously in the background. The timing is randomised each time between 1 and
100ms, and draws between 2 and 10 random numbers each time for an average of around 138 times per second.
The randomness of the cycling is provided by a separate RNG.
Additionally, the OpenSSL RNG updates its state regularly with entropy drawn from the system.
All these things are considered separate devices and that's why they reference them separately. Otherwise there would be no need to have separate sections for seeding and cycling. It could have been described with the Poker RNG. And the only device they describe in detail is the device they state they tested, the Poker RNG.
Thanks for playing but you truly need to educate yourself before you talk because I'm guessing your background is high school at best.
For people who think online poker is rigged, how do you explain long-term winning/ professional players? Is your answer that they are just winning less than possible but still enough to be a pro? Or do you have other explanations? Thanks.
For people who think online poker is rigged, how do you explain long-term winning/ professional players? Is your answer that they are just winning less than possible but still enough to be a pro? Or do you have other explanations? Thanks.
Issues with the RNG doesn't mean AA against KK isn't favored. It means it's favored less or more than 4 to 1.
IIRC I actually played something like 32000 hands and went all in 1200 hands. My equity was over 51.5% but I won only 49,1% of my EV. But guess what I actually won a small amount during that time. Based on my bad "luck" I should have lost big. Now is the RNG skewed that badly where you will often lose over 50% of your EV, almost certainly not, but the probability it is skewed to some degree is pretty high because the chances you would win less than 50%. of your EV over 1200 hands is extremely small if the RNG produced outcomes close to the mathematical probabilities.
IIRC I actually played something like 32000 hands and went all in 1200 hands. My equity was over 51.5% but I won only 49,1% of my EV.
For clarification. Of the 1200 hands you went all in with, you had an average equity of over 51.5%? And of these hands you ran over 50% below ev? Do you have a screenshot of the stats from HEM/PT etc..?
But I quoted chatGPT to prove you wrong many times and you ignore it. You read more selectively than anybody else.Even now, you say its all software but you also quote that the "rng draws bytes from the openssl rng."I have referenced this section many times, you say i havent but thats because theres a plate in your head where your eyesight should be:"The OpenSSL RNG seeds itsel
I'm just curious, why haven't you taken my money yet?
$100 to play heads up
$500 says tou can't beat 10NL on WPTGOLD for even 1000 hands.
I have yet to receive any DM to finalize terms or anything. If you're such a winning poker pro with so much money how have you not taken this free $600 yet?
I just can't make sense of it.
You can see that many hands in a weekend and you'll be able to bust me in 10 minutes...
For clarification. Of the 1200 hands you went all in with, you had an average equity of over 51.5%? And of these hands you ran over 50% below ev? Do you have a screenshot of the stats from HEM/PT etc..?
Only have screenshot from hold'em manager
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
You have to subtract the 1.9 million from the total I won since my equity on those hands is 100%. As stated in the post I was referring to the all in adjusted differential of all the all in hands where my equity was greater than 0 but less than 100%, because if you are at 0 or 100 you have already lost or won and the differential would be zero on both so there is no point including those hands as there is no chance you can get lucky or unlucky at that point
For clarification. Of the 1200 hands you went all in with, you had an average equity of over 51.5%? And of these hands you ran over 50% below ev? Do you have a screenshot of the stats from HEM/PT etc..?
Here is my 1 screenshot from PT showing the average all in equity but it's with 36000 hands
They all followed suit after Black Friday. Due to the huge loss of players, they could simply not survive if they had a deck that mirrored the real game.A lot of sites had traffic of around 500 players at any given time. To have 20 or so easily beating the minute bank of players left, would result in closure.Faced with closure or helping the poorer players stay in the game, the
So pre black friday you were beating the games and after you weren't.
What could possibly be the reason for that.
Must be rigged.
Coming from a loser who can't realise that he just sucks at poker. Maybe ask your parents for advice lol.
Must be the fish protection you and other rigturds keep yapping about.
As someone who does not question poker sites, there would be no reason for you to see the statement that it is not technically possible.
I do question poker sites, you've made another wrong assumption. I've seen cheater colliders superusers etc in my day so it makes sense to be careful. Never seen a rigged rng however.
But since part of your "evidence" is build around that numerous sites have told you its not possible and wont benefit them to rig decks, why not show it? There is no reason to withhold this evidene from anyone.
And to be clear, even Galfond didnt say sites would benefit from rigging the rng, that quote doesnt exist either? But then again, he ran a pokersite and runs a coaching. So he is part of the evil greedy people😉
Casual players make up the most traffic on any given day, of course it would be in their interests to protect these, the regs are already there to stay.
Simply untrue and you can download hands to see if fish play more hands than regs but I'll reveal that regs make up way way more volume than fish.
Also, that regs are here to stay makes no sense. So regs dont switch sites?? If a reg (playing 20 hours a week minimum) is breakeven on site 1 and winning on site 2 you think he will forever stick around site 1??? Would explain why you're not a reg.
You are either one of the most relentless trolls or the most braindead person in this thread, and thats saying a lot.
If you didnt have seperate sections you would indeed have a PRNG, but using that rng in combination with the hardware rng makes the poker rng (total) unpredictable.
You avoid this question all the time but please answer because I want to know what crazy thought are going through your brain: What do you think the rng-certificate company does? You do realize they see millions of hands and see AND JUDGE the outcome right? They dont look at a specific line of coding for the rng and say thats it then. If they only looked at software parts of rng (they didnt, but you believe so) how did all the millions of hands they analyzed for unpredictably and fairness come out clean?
For people who think online poker is rigged, how do you explain long-term winning/ professional players? Is your answer that they are just winning less than possible but still enough to be a pro? Or do you have other explanations? Thanks.
Issues with the RNG doesn't mean AA against KK isn't favored. It means it's favored less or more than 4 to 1.
How does that answer his question?
So pro's get more AA vs KK than others?
The RNG is there to benefit weak players, you've said it all the times.
Pro's are the opposite of weak players, how can they sustain the rng rigged against them and still make a living compared to you and the likes that so clearly cant?
I'm just curious, why haven't you taken my money yet?
$500 says tou can't beat 10NL on WPTGOLD for even 1000 hands.
I have yet to receive any DM to finalize terms or anything. If you're such a winning poker pro with so much money how have you not taken this free $600 yet?
..
I openly accepted it numerous times, so no need for secret stuff in DM. lets keep it public
Nonetheless i did DM you, I will play 1k hands on 10nl, beat it, and receive $500 from you. Take care
How does that answer his question?
So pro's get more AA vs KK than others?
The RNG is there to benefit weak players, you've said it all the times.
Pro's are the opposite of weak players, how can they sustain the rng rigged against them and still make a living compared to you and the likes that so clearly cant?
If he had a question he could ask about it. If you don't understand well that's a common problem with you. Must have kicked your butt too hard for you to protest so much.
BUT BUT BUT, BMM why did you state the cycling RNG is a separate RNG. The Poker RNG needs it to function and receives inputs from it to trigger the cycling. But more importantly Slugant says it's part of the Poker RNG.
As I said your delusional grandeur.
And the Gambling Commission monthly newsletter is out today… guess what? Yep, yet another fine for treating customers unfairly.
50% of players notice the decks acting in bizarre ways. This is the only part of their business that does not come under scrutiny.
They are being fined every month for the way they act in all other aspects towards customers. You choose to believe that decks are not favouring what makes most money for the sites, just because it’s not possible to prove it.
Yet they are proven to consistently treat customers unfairly to make money as much money as they possibly can in every other aspect.
Wow that’s some trust!
If he had a question he could ask about it.
(IGNORING EVERY QUESTION HE CANT ANSWER AND MAKING STUFF UP ABOUT THE RNG, TALK ABOUT A DISTRACTION)
You are insane and have no interest in learning something. You think you got it all right. Yes, all the sites rig their rng to make you, a microstakes player, lose $200 thats obviosuly what happened.
You have no answer to this:
"So pro's get more AA vs KK than others?
The RNG is there to benefit weak players, you've said it all the times.
Pro's are the opposite of weak players, how can they sustain the rng rigged against them and still make a living compared to you and the likes that so clearly cant?"
You have contradicted yourself so many times that even your crazy imagination cant think of something that fits that fictive situation.
Same way you ignore this question time and time again. If you fail to answer these 2 (over multiple times) we can just all assume that you have no answer to these questions and no clue what you are talking about. Otherwise you wouldnt keep on ignoring these questions and you could easily explain...
What do you think the rng-certificate company does? You do realize they see millions of hands and see AND JUDGE the outcome right? They dont look at a specific line of coding for the rng and say thats it then. If they only looked at software parts of rng (they didnt, but you believe so) how did all the millions of hands they analyzed for unpredictably and fairness come out clean?
Btw, you know you fit the definition of a weak player right? So if the RNG acts like you claim it would have in fact favored you... and yet still you lose🙂
Waddy, you were mad for people making the distinction between fines for rigging and other stuff.
Yet you keep on posting screenshots of gambling companies (not even all offer poker) being fined for stuff not related to the rng. This was, like in most cases, a licensing issue
You want us to know gambling companies are scum?? You might have a good point there
You want us to know the rng is rigged?? Then show us companies being fined for a rigged rng
I can show you fines companies have gotten for false advertisement or not providing enough information about the product. It means that company didnt follow those rules. It doesnt mean the product the offer is rigged. This is not a causal relationship.
Just because company does bad thing A doesnt mean company does bad thing B.
A shoplifter isnt a killer.
yeah weird how gambling companies get fined all the time. its almost as if they were under constant scrutiny.
yet never has a site been fined for messing with the rng. must be because in this one area a vig conspiracy is going on!
there is no other explanation!
You are insane and have no interest in learning something. You think you got it all right. Yes, all the sites rig their rng to make you, a microstakes player, lose $200 thats obviosuly what happened.You have no answer to this:"So pro's get more AA vs KK than others?The RNG is there to benefit weak players, you've said it all the times.Pro's are the opposite of weak players, how
Slugant if that is your real name, you must have forgotten the lessons Johnmir bestowed upon us. The winning players are not the good players. the winning players have accounts rigged in their favour.
The good players like Johmir, amazing and waddy have accounts rigged against them.
So your arguments doesnt work. Amazing is only losing because the rng is rigged against him otherwise he would be crushing high stakes.
Some of you fail to see the relevance of the site fines that amount to millions, which are all to do with treating customers illegally and with utter contempt.
Slugant says regs are more important than the rest of the players.
I quoted Galfond as he’s a respected player AND he’s run a poker site. He obviously defends the rig theory but says it’s possible.
Let’s consider another comment he made;
When players win big, they cash out, when players lose big they leave… active players are everything to a site.
Now we know businesses have meetings to maximise profit.
This a group of people who have made decisions push boundaries with customers that have resulted in huge fines. These same people are considering how can they stop players winning too much that they want to cash out and losing players losing too much … as this will maximise profit …
Now how would they do that. Let’s have a think in the board room. I’m putting my hand up and guessing that having a deck that achieves the above objectives would be the answer.
This is the only area of the business that if they were to tamper with illegally, it can not be proved.
What you are saying is they pass up on that opportunity and focus on cheating on advertising, money laundering and player financial limits instead … the areas that ARE scrutinised by regulators.
Bit of a poor business plan.
We dont need to argue about if all sites are behavingly holy, im with you on that. I had some very critical stuff on GG and agree that sites are in it mostly to make a buck. I am also active in poker to make money so im not sure I can really blame them for that.
But what you are convinced of and trying to convince others of is that the rng is rigged, which is the main point of this entire thread. And unlicensed sites does not equal rigged decks.. because would that mean that sites that do operate according to the books and have a proper license (and rng certification for that matter) are fair play?
You say sites have been fined and that they all had to do with treating customers with utter contempt.
Lets take ACR who has been fined in my country for operating without the proper license. How is them offering me some juicy games and 29% rb treating me with utter contempt?
I know they are unlicensed, I decide to play there. Every individual has his right to choose or avoid any site that caters to them. Most of the fines have been license-related and I as a customer dont feel contempt for the sites where I can play that arent licensed in my country like acr and coinpoker.
I didnt say regs are more important than other players, fish are needed in the poker ecology. They do make up for 80%+ of the volume, even higher on the stakes where the rake is absolutely higher. Your teacher of wisdom Galfond even says active players are everything on a site. Who do you regard more active, the regs grinding out 50k+ hands each month or the fishes that often dont even reach 5k hands a month. Every table on a decent limit is 80% reg. Like on a full midstakes 6max game its almost always 1 weaker player and 5 regs. The starting tables are all regs.
Regs also have bills to pay and are often professionals but certainly not financially set for life. They cant cash it all out and retire, big winners often cash out some winnings but they also keep playing. In fact, players often stop when they cant win anymore.
Honest question, since I respect Galfond as a player as well, he had tremendous results in the past. But he was a pokersite owner. The very kind you seem to despise and are saying they treat customers with utter contempt. Why is Galfond an exception to this? He ran a pokersite and runs a coaching site not for charity.. he is out to make money as well.
If winning players are stopped by a rng, how do explain guys like Linus that crush it. Or even guys like me who beat midstakes 15 years+? It shouldnt be possible with the way you describe to rigged deck to work.
And a rigged deck can be proven, its been explained many times. If a deck favors losing players or disadvantages winning players this would be an outlier to the expected. Over a large enough sample this would prove tampering. Why are riggies so certain of their stance but not willing to do this work? You could easily have prove. If nobody does the decide to do the work you are right in saying that rigged the deck would be your "guess". My guess is a actually the same as Galfond in that poker sites are not rigging their decks. He seems to be your guide, do you disagree with him on that area?
Also, since in your view rigging the deck make for longer lasting players and more volume that surely means that the biggest site (gg) is rigging way more than a very little site? So to be safe you'd better play a low-volume site since they clearly arent rigging it right.. So GG rigs the system a lot more than iPoker?
btw I have seen your quote from galfond in this video
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XP2Tx3zRs...
He actually says:
"Is poker rigged? If you ask a lot of people they will say yes.
At any large site i would be shocked if any of them are riggin the action.
A very common theory is that they rig the action so that there are bigger pots and more suckouts so that generates more rake. There is no incentive to do this."
The image is also from a larger collection which you selectively chosen 1 out of. I show you a few more of them from the same series about rigging. Lets consider those comments he made as well 😉
And this one has got to sting a lil bit🙂
The man you respect so much and quote a lot is saying "IF YOU BELIEVE ANY POPULAR POKER SITE HAS A RIGGED RNG, YOU'RE NOT READY TO BE A REAL WINNER"
So your poker guru Galfond doesnt think poker is rigged, he actually says its a poor business plan and they have to be idiots to do it, why do you keep quoting him trying to prove otherwise?
Coming from a loser who can't realise that he just sucks at poker. Maybe ask your parents for advice lol.
Must be the fish protection you and other rigturds keep yapping about.
Oh look your little friends are here to console you after your ass kicking. You would think they could come up with something better, pathetic.
Here is my 1 screenshot from PT showing the average all in equity but it's with 36000 hands
Thanks for posting/linking. In fairness I am not an stats expert and I also mainly play cash games so I find the results difficult to interpret. If you believe they are wildly out of line maybe you can create a thread in the mtt sub forum to gather more expert opinions, because I have received misleading info from AI LLMs about poker topics numerous times.
I wonder people who think online poker is rigged are more likely to play mtts/sngs, lots of the videos on YT about online poker being rigged are of tournaments where you will experience bad beats more frequently than cash games. I remember playing SNGs a long time ago and tilting like crazy so I think someone with a certain set of psychological characteristics may be more swayed to thinking its rigged if playing these formats.
We dont need to argue about if all sites are behavingly holy, im with you on that. I had some very critical stuff on GG and agree that sites are in it mostly to make a buck. I am also active in poker to make money so im not sure I can really blame them for that.But what you are convinced of and trying to convince others of is that the rng is rigged, which is the main point of t
Again you dot get the point. If you read my post I say Galfond obviously whilst saying online poker isnt rigged in his opinion, lets out honest facts along the way.
Why would a player who believes this be MY guru!!!!
I quote him during this interview because he is the only person I have seen who owns a poker site that has been prepared to drop in some truth, where as all the big poker companies have lied on certain facts.
He says its possible to rig poker decks. 888 Poker told me its technically impossible.
He says that whilst he knows sites are greedy/shady enough to rig decks, he feels they would be stupid to do so. All big sites say this would not reward them, but heres Galfond saying it would but they would be stupid to do so.
He also sets out the main objective that makes site the maximum amount of money .. keeping losers in the game and keeping winning players to a more modest profit.
The main objective of any poker business. The holy grail of maximising profit. And with sketchy regulation meaning that if the did rig, it could never be proved. And with their reputation for endless fines in cheating the rules in other areas.
It would take a massive amount of trust to believe yes they cheat the system in other areas, but the one 50% of players have noticed is wrong and could maximise profits, they dont touch.
Jesus man if you were any slower you would be moving backwards.
888 says that with their infrastructure it is impossible for them to rig a deck . this very likely is not a lie.
Galfond says that theoretically you could create an infrastructure under which you could rig a deck.
He says that whilst he knows sites are greedy/shady enough to rig decks, he feels they would be stupid to do so. All big sites say this would not reward them, but heres Galfond saying it would but they would be stupid to do so.
So poker sites say it is NOT beneficial for them to rig their decks
Galfond says sites do NOT rig their decks, in fact they would be idiots to do it. It rigging would benefit them, they wouldnt be idiots to it duhhh
But you believe they do. You've said it countless times that the RNG is rigged. And you quote Galfond left and right and have outspoken respect for him as a player and a human.
So why do you have the opposite view of him when it comes to rigged rng's?
One of your most promising pieces of evidence was a reanectment of how those board meetings might go, you said "Now how would they do that. Let’s have a think in the board room. I’m putting my hand up and guessing that having a deck that achieves the above objectives would be the answer."
Well, Galfond was in those board meetings as the head of the operation. And yet he still believes sites are idiots if they rig it. He was there. If this was going on during board meetings he would tell us. Or do you think he would it keep secret like those other pokersite running scum of the earth contemptful bastards?
Lets just end on this beautiful quote by Phil for all you riggies:
"IF YOU BELIEVE ANY POPULAR POKER SITE HAS A RIGGED RNG, YOU'RE NOT READY TO BE A REAL WINNER"
Oh look your little friends are here to console you after your ass kicking. You would think they could come up with something better, pathetic.
Talk about a quality response, you've nailed it🙂
You've had some to think in the matrix now, wonder if you now could answer these questions or you will ignore them for the 10th time while calling other people pathetic:
--
"So pro's get more AA vs KK than others?
The RNG is there to benefit weak players, you've said it all the times.
Pro's are the opposite of weak players, how can they sustain the rng rigged against them and still make a living compared to you and the likes that so clearly cant?"
You have contradicted yourself so many times that even your crazy imagination cant think of something that fits that fictive situation.
Same way you ignore this question time and time again. If you fail to answer these 2 (over multiple times) we can just all assume that you have no answer to these questions and no clue what you are talking about. Otherwise you wouldnt keep on ignoring these questions and you could easily explain...
What do you think the rng-certificate company does? You do realize they see millions of hands and see AND JUDGE the outcome right? They dont look at a specific line of coding for the rng and say thats it then. If they only looked at software parts of rng (they didnt, but you believe so) how did all the millions of hands they analyzed for unpredictably and fairness come out clean?
Btw, you know you fit the definition of a weak player right? So if the RNG acts like you claim it would have in fact favored you... and yet still you lose
--
Its almost like Galfond once said:
"IF YOU BELIEVE ANY POPULAR POKER SITE HAS A RIGGED RNG, YOU'RE NOT READY TO BE A REAL WINNER"
😃😃😃😃😃😃😃
So poker sites say it is NOT beneficial for them to rig their decksGalfond says sites do NOT rig their decks, in fact they would be idiots to do it. It rigging would benefit them, they wouldnt be idiots to it duhhhBut you believe they do. You've said it countless times that the RNG is rigged. And you quote Galfond left and right and have outspoken respect for him as a player an
Galfond doesnt (or didn’t) believe that rigging was the way to go. His site lasted 2yrs and he lost $10m.
He says sites act badly enough to do it. He pointed out what maximises profits. He knew what makes a successful site. His thoughts are sites would be stupid to take advantage.
Sadly, he thought he could do it his way, run an honest site and be successful.
He was wrong.
