I voted no, and the main reason is this. The poker rooms make no money off what you win or lose. They make all their money off the rake. So why would they ever risk the huge amount of money they make off of that, just to screw some random player who donates money to there cause? I mean to you think when Mattster signed up for Stars they said well "this guy we will make a star, but that PPP guy we will make him a lifetime loser here @ stars. People think they see numerous bad beats, but what they forget to relize is these sites deal probly close if not more then 100 times as many hands as any real B&M Casino.
Firemanx, the following is a quotation from a poker book. I'm taking the time to type it because I couldn't answer your question any better in my own words. I hope this will open some people's eyes:
"Poker businesses are based in foreign countries, which reap a large tax windfall by giving them safe haven. The faceless cyber honchos answer to no one, and their computers totally control the action. So what would keep them from stealing you blind?
All you have to hang your hat on is a single tired argument. "The owners make so much money that they wouldn't risk killing the goose that's laying the golden eggs by cheating customers.They are making more than enough money without cheating." Does this extremely logical argument sound familiar? It should. It is the exact same argument you always heard back when the Mob owned the Las Vegas casinos. Everyone knew the Underworld ran them, and everyone knew mobsters were the most dishonest, brutal people on the planet. So why did anyone in his or her right mind gamble with them? Because normal, logical people believed it made no sense for them to cheat - not with that huge House edge making them millions. But they did cheat. All the time. In fact, they considered it a point of honor not to let a "sucker" out of the casino with any of "their" money - or any money at all. Were greedy mobsters winning tons and tons of money? Absolutely yes, but there is never enough.
"Murder, Inc." was just maximizing its profits, like any corporation. Mobsters did what they could get away with, just like Enron, Worldcom, and their other corporate brethren. Even for billion-dollar corporations there's never enough capital, the edge is never big enough, and you're only as good as your last quarterly report, which had better top the previous one. The Mob controlled Vegas under the noses of regulators, and Enron execs (and others) robbed people blind despite federal oversight. Thus, it is naive to believe that gambling websites - which for practical purposes are unregulated - are all fair and honest, especially in view of the seedy characters attracted by gambling and easy money. If you were in their shoes, wouldn't you want to make as much as you possibly could before it all came crashing down?
You will meet some of the most honorable people in the world playing poker, but you will also encounter types who would steal their grandma's Social Security check if they could get away with it. Now we're talking millions of dollars here...and someone's going to tell you what your cards are...from Central America...and you'll just have to take his word for it. Anyone who can devise worldwide poker software can easily create a way for that computer to take a little extra for the House and eventually break you.
Corporations exist to make profits and they want every last nickel they can get their hands on, so don't think that just because organized crime sold its Vegas casinos, that todays owners are on your side. They want your money just as badly as the Mob did, and they have tricks of their own."
In case you guys missed it, here's a message I posted on 2-8-07.
"check out the web site Reviewed-Poker.com. There you'll find a couple of posts that claim that during an Omaha hand on Poker Stars 5 dueces were shown down. Several people also noticed and Poker Stars was emailed. A response took days and showed that the hand history was altered. That, and my own experiences at that site, were enough to avoid Poker Stars and do some research before commiting any money to a site."
"check out the web site Reviewed-Poker.com. There you'll find a couple of posts that claim that during an Omaha hand on Poker Stars 5 dueces were shown down. Several people also noticed and Poker Stars was emailed. A response took days and showed that the hand history was altered. That, and my own experiences at that site, were enough to avoid Poker Stars and do some research before commiting any money to a site."
Are you serious focus?
Are you aware that there are probabilities in this game? For example that starting hand A will be a 70:30 favorite over starting hand B in an all-in showdown. Now if over a large number of hands starting hand B would win 70% of those showdowns, wouldn't you say that something has to be wrong.
I'm not saying that I have such proof (even though I'm convinced this is going on at Riggedstars all the time). I'm just saying that there is certainly a way to proof irregularities in an online shuffle if you track it for a long enough time.
We now have 20 votes in and not even a third of all people have voted in favor of Riggedstars. Even though it's only a small sample size, I wonder how their advocates explain that. Oh wait, I forgot. We're all fish blaming others for our lack of poker skills.
It can't be rigged for one person that i believe. However, i defintly think the software is rigged for hands you have to play so they can get there rake money. This is the way they make money. Yes i know the bigeest rake they make is three bucks, know matter what the size of the pot is. I think the only way to get too the bottom of this is there has too be a full invetigation on the way online poker is dealt. If it was regulated Then we would know.
Even after this hand ... I dont think it's rigged
POKERSTARS GAME #9853033542: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($0.50/$1.00) - 2007/05/11 - 03:02:06 (ET)
Table 'Merope IV' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: 1love ($67.30 in chips)
Seat 2: Tomison ($103.45 in chips)
Seat 3: toluschev ($100 in chips)
Seat 4: b1grich ($127.25 in chips)
Seat 6: zeroez ($33.45 in chips)
Seat 7: cgl846 ($104.10 in chips)
Seat 9: Nimbletoe ($81 in chips)
Tomison: posts small blind $0.50
toluschev: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to b1grich [3h 3s]
b1grich: calls $1
zeroez: calls $1
cgl846: calls $1
Nimbletoe: folds
1love: raises $4 to $5
Tomison: folds
toluschev: folds
b1grich: calls $4
zeroez: folds
cgl846: folds
*** FLOP *** [Ac 3d 3c]
b1grich: checks
1love: bets $4
b1grich: calls $4
*** TURN *** [Ac 3d 3c] [Tc]
b1grich: checks
1love: bets $9
b1grich: calls $9
*** RIVER *** [Ac 3d 3c Tc] [Th]
b1grich: bets $25
1love: raises $24.30 to $49.30 and is all-in
b1grich: calls $24.30
*** SHOW DOWN ***
1love: shows [Td Ts] (four of a kind, Tens)
b1grich: mucks hand
1love collected $135.10 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $138.10 | Rake $3
Board [Ac 3d 3c Tc Th]
Seat 1: 1love (button) showed [Td Ts] and won ($135.10) with four of a kind, Tens
Seat 2: Tomison (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: toluschev (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: b1grich mucked [3h 3s]
Seat 6: zeroez folded before Flop
Seat 7: cgl846 folded before Flop
Seat 9: Nimbletoe folded before Flop (didn't bet)
POKERSTARS GAME #9853033542: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($0.50/$1.00) - 2007/05/11 - 03:02:06 (ET)
Table 'Merope IV' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: 1love ($67.30 in chips)
Seat 2: Tomison ($103.45 in chips)
Seat 3: toluschev ($100 in chips)
Seat 4: b1grich ($127.25 in chips)
Seat 6: zeroez ($33.45 in chips)
Seat 7: cgl846 ($104.10 in chips)
Seat 9: Nimbletoe ($81 in chips)
Tomison: posts small blind $0.50
toluschev: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to b1grich [3h 3s]
b1grich: calls $1
zeroez: calls $1
cgl846: calls $1
Nimbletoe: folds
1love: raises $4 to $5
Tomison: folds
toluschev: folds
b1grich: calls $4
zeroez: folds
cgl846: folds
*** FLOP *** [Ac 3d 3c]
b1grich: checks
1love: bets $4
b1grich: calls $4
*** TURN *** [Ac 3d 3c] [Tc]
b1grich: checks
1love: bets $9
b1grich: calls $9
*** RIVER *** [Ac 3d 3c Tc] [Th]
b1grich: bets $25
1love: raises $24.30 to $49.30 and is all-in
b1grich: calls $24.30
*** SHOW DOWN ***
1love: shows [Td Ts] (four of a kind, Tens)
b1grich: mucks hand
1love collected $135.10 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $138.10 | Rake $3
Board [Ac 3d 3c Tc Th]
Seat 1: 1love (button) showed [Td Ts] and won ($135.10) with four of a kind, Tens
Seat 2: Tomison (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: toluschev (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: b1grich mucked [3h 3s]
Seat 6: zeroez folded before Flop
Seat 7: cgl846 folded before Flop
Seat 9: Nimbletoe folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Stranger things have happend, but the majority of hands that I lose or get knocked out on are unbelievable. The other player has less than 4-5 outs and they always seem to hit the cards or cards they need.
Is it bad luck or just something else.
I'll see if I can set up a list of my tournaments that I play at Poker X Factor and you can see what I'm talking about. If it happens once every 10-15 tournys I play, I wouldnt have a problem, but when It happens 9 out of 10 times It makes one wonder.
Is it bad luck or just something else.
I'll see if I can set up a list of my tournaments that I play at Poker X Factor and you can see what I'm talking about. If it happens once every 10-15 tournys I play, I wouldnt have a problem, but when It happens 9 out of 10 times It makes one wonder.
I don't think it's rigged..
but there is a thread here that dates a while back about "ranking the players" based on their play after a while
what this does is put you into different tiers based upon your play and then make it probably that someone from the "lower tier" will catch more cards than a "top tier player"
what this would do is evenly distribute the money in the site and keep more players happy.
not that i subscribe to this theory but it was an interesting read...i will try to find the thread.
but there is a thread here that dates a while back about "ranking the players" based on their play after a while
what this does is put you into different tiers based upon your play and then make it probably that someone from the "lower tier" will catch more cards than a "top tier player"
what this would do is evenly distribute the money in the site and keep more players happy.
not that i subscribe to this theory but it was an interesting read...i will try to find the thread.
Can you guys read this and tell me what you make of it, This tells me it's not rigged and i want too believe i am playing in a fair and square game. I have to say i think i am addicted to online poker. Pokerstars seems like the eaisest place for US players. There new trupay works great. Also my friend just won two grand and he got paid.
SHUFFLE
"Anyone who considers arithmetic methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin." - John von Neumann, 1951
We understand that a use of a fair and unpredictable shuffle algorithm is critical to our software. To ensure this and avoid major problems described in [2], we are using two independent sources of truly random data:
Shuffle Highlights:
PokerStars submitted extensive information about the PokerStars random number generator (RNG) to two independent organizations. We asked these two trusted resources to perform an in-depth analysis of the randomness of the output of the RNG, and its implementation in the shuffling of the cards on PokerStars.
Both independent companies were given full access to the source code and confirmed the randomness and security of our shuffle. Visit Online Poker Random Number Generator for more details.
Games Available Through PokerStars Secure Poker Software
The following poker games and poker tournaments are available through PokerStars' secure poker software:
[2] "How We Learned to Cheat at Online Poker: A Study in Software Security" - http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/616221
[3] "The Intel Random Number Generator" - http://www.cryptography.com/resources/whitepapers/IntelRNG.pdf
<!-- END CONTENT -->
SHUFFLE
"Anyone who considers arithmetic methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin." - John von Neumann, 1951
We understand that a use of a fair and unpredictable shuffle algorithm is critical to our software. To ensure this and avoid major problems described in [2], we are using two independent sources of truly random data:
- user input, including summary of mouse movements and events timing, collected from client software
- true hardware random number generator developed by Intel [3], which uses thermal noise as an entropy source
Shuffle Highlights:
- A deck of 52 cards can be shuffled in 52! ways. 52! is about 2^225 (to be precise, 80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,404,000,000,000,000,000 ways). We use 249 random bits from both entropy sources (user input and thermal noise) to achieve an even and unpredictable statistical distribution.
- Furthermore, we apply conservative rules to enforce the required degree of randomness; for instance, if user input does not generate required amount of entropy, we do not start the next hand until we obtain the required amount of entropy from Intel RNG.
- We use the SHA-1 cryptographic hash algorithm to mix the entropy gathered from both sources to provide an extra level of security
- We also maintain a SHA-1-based pseudo-random generator to provide even more security and protection from user data attacks
- To convert random bit stream to random numbers within a required range without bias, we use a simple and reliable algorithm. For example, if we need a random number in the range 0-25:
- we take 5 random bits and convert them to a random number 0-31
- if this number is greater than 25 we just discard all 5 bits and repeat the process
- This method is not affected by biases related to modulus operation for generation of random numbers that are not 2n, n = 1,2,..
- To perform an actual shuffle, we use another simple and reliable algorithm:
- first we draw a random card from the original deck (1 of 52) and place it in a new deck - now original deck contains 51 cards and the new deck contains 1 card
- then we draw another random card from the original deck (1 of 51) and place it on top of the new deck - now original deck contains 50 cards and the new deck contains 2 cards
- we repeat the process until all cards have moved from the original deck to the new deck
- This algorithm does not suffer from "Bad Distribution Of Shuffles" described in [2]
PokerStars submitted extensive information about the PokerStars random number generator (RNG) to two independent organizations. We asked these two trusted resources to perform an in-depth analysis of the randomness of the output of the RNG, and its implementation in the shuffling of the cards on PokerStars.
Both independent companies were given full access to the source code and confirmed the randomness and security of our shuffle. Visit Online Poker Random Number Generator for more details.
Games Available Through PokerStars Secure Poker Software
The following poker games and poker tournaments are available through PokerStars' secure poker software:
- <LI class=first>Texas Holdem <LI class=second>Omaha High Low
- Omaha High
- Stud High Low
- Stud High
- Razz
- HORSE
- Draw
- 2-7 Triple Draw
[2] "How We Learned to Cheat at Online Poker: A Study in Software Security" - http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/616221
[3] "The Intel Random Number Generator" - http://www.cryptography.com/resources/whitepapers/IntelRNG.pdf
<!-- END CONTENT -->
