Do Poker Rooms Cheat?

[Andromedan]

Thanks for the welcome.

I am a poker affiliate, sorry, should have mentioned that. I have been an active promoter of free bankrolls for years now and some rakeback at the side, but nothing impressive.

I was not thinking in the line of what I have to offer this community; just responding on this discussion.

Originally Posted by LadyHoldem

Welcome to the forum, you are of course welcome to your opinion.. but .. are you lost? Go back to when you hit register.. what did you think you would gain from your membership here? What is it that you have to offer to the community?

I'm not saying you're wrong or right, just that this is an affiliate forum you've just made your first post in, and I'm not seeing how you can benefit from being a member of an affiliate forum, as you don't sound much like an affiliate, or promoter of online poker..

[PPP]

Originally Posted by Andromedan

I also think the psychological aspect of denial plays a key role in the war between the believers and the non-believers.

Yes the world is full of people who rely on "feel" and prejudice, while another part relies on math and logic and evidence. Poker is Darwinian because smarter people take money from dumber people simply by being smarter, and in control of their emotions.

In nearly a decade of online poker not one of these "feel" folks has posted one group of hand histories, ever, besides the AP ones which DID show cheating, that shows anything wonky, mostly because they have no clue how to get a hand history, let alone 1000, let alone have a clue how to analyze them.

And that's why people who do know how to do these things smile as they cash the checks of the money that used to belong to the people who are too busy "feeling" that they lost for some other reason than they suck at online poker.

[Andromedan]

It was not necessarily an argument, just my thoughts, no anger. My thoughts are not based on a single room, but on more than 25 at least, constantly seeing a pattern that doesn't make sense to me.

Many times I have asked myself, "Why is it almost impossible to lose in the first few hands or days and impossible to win after that, constantly being bad beaten on even the best hands". This does not imply I haven't played for weeks or months at a single room. I have been playing poker for over 4/5 years now.

I have come to a point where my thoughts and feelings have become relatively stable, having a little piece with the fact that things might not be as fair as they appear to be. However, this required quite some time, as one wants to fight what is not right. I can safely say that I'm a firm believer of corruption in the online gambling world, without being afraid of any comments or arguments from other people. I am lucky I didn't waste entire bankrolls, because that would have made me angry. I'm not going to lie about that.

I just wanted to express my opinion in this discussion, nothing more. Also, I rather not fight about anything regarding this, everyone should think or believe what they want. Whether I'm wrong or not, things are the way they are. I admit I'm not sure, so that makes me a believer.

Originally Posted by ThePokerBank

That was one of the better structured arguements that I have come across suggesting online poker is rigged, most of them are just people getting mad because they lost on pocket aces.

It looks like have suggested quite a lot, but not really brought any proof to the table to back up your arguements though.



I'm sure I could find you a few hundred other players that say the exact opposite, so it doesn't really mean anything. Also, playing at a poker room for a few days isn't enough to suggest the room is rigged. At most you are going to play a few hundred hands a day, which is not nearly enough to say a room might be rigged.

If I flipped a coin 10 times and it came up heads twice, and tails 8 times, would you say the coin was rigged? No, its just probability and you would accept that. However, if we instead had bet $10 on each flip and you chose heads, I'm sure that you and others would be all too happy to suggest that my coin was 'rigged' somehow, even though it wasn't.

People are not happy when they lose money, and they want to find a reason why. When it comes to Poker, its much easier to say the cardrooms are rigged rather than admit that their game needs some work.

All the arguements for online poker being rigged always circle around "I think this" or "I think that". There are never any stats or figures or proof to back it up (except in the one-off AP case). If you really think online poker is rigged, then go get PokerOffice or PokerTracker and play a few thousand hands. When you look at the data and find some proof that the RNG isn't working correctly, maybe more people will take notice.

The whole 'rigged' arguements also confuse me. Who is it rigged for? Some people must not realise that card rooms make money through your rake, and not directly from your losses.

[Andromedan]

I have not based anything on hand histories, so that probably makes me speculative. I admit, what I 'think' is purely from 4 years of pattern recognition of win/lose timing that doesn't make sense to me.

Logic means a lot to me, but my instinct just as much. I stand humble against logic, because in my opinion logic is complete when all participating factors are present, and when can one take them all in consideration. In this case, I think it is a bit of both. In this case I obviously don't have all the factors that would complete the 'poker rigging' logic/fact, so it is a one man opinion.

Originally Posted by PPP

Yes the world is full of people who rely on "feel" and prejudice, while another part relies on math and logic and evidence. Poker is Darwinian because smarter people take money from dumber people simply by being smarter, and in control of their emotions.

In nearly a decade of online poker not one of these "feel" folks has posted one group of hand histories, ever, besides the AP ones which DID show cheating, that shows anything wonky, mostly because they have no clue how to get a hand history, let alone 1000, let alone have a clue how to analyze them.

And that's why people who do know how to do these things smile as they cash the checks of the money that used to belong to the people who are too busy "feeling" that they lost for some other reason than they suck at online poker.

[PPP]

Originally Posted by Andromedan

I have not based anything on hand histories, so that probably makes me speculative. I admit, what I 'think' is purely from 4 years of pattern recognition of win/lose timing that doesn't make sense to me.

Logic means a lot to me, but my instinct just as much. I stand humble against logic, because in my opinion logic is complete when all participating factors are present, and when can one take them all in consideration. In this case, I think it is a bit of both. In this case I obviously don't have all the factors that would complete the 'poker rigging' logic/fact, so it is a one man opinion.

The pattern you should be recognizing is you are not a very good player, and the longer you play, the more this becomes true (which is the norm for most players, the more pots they lose, the more they tilt and play less optimum, etc.)

If after all this time, you have not used hand histories to evaluate your play, you are by definition a very poor player. Any losing player who does not do this (and cares about winning rather than just 'fun') creates their own reality. Play bad, lose, don't do anything to improve, keep losing and lose more by being more frustrated.

It's easy to get better as a poker player, but it's not easy for some people to take responsibility for their failings. Instead they blame the others, and do so without making the slightest effort to gain any evidence.

[Andromedan]

I am getting out of the discussion.

The fact is I'm a bad player, ok. Great logic

Originally Posted by PPP

The pattern you should be recognizing is you are not a very good player, and the longer you play, the more this becomes true (which is the norm for most players, the more pots they lose, the more they tilt and play less optimum, etc.)

If after all this time, you have not used hand histories to evaluate your play, you are by definition a very poor player. Any losing player who does not do this (and cares about winning rather than just 'fun') creates their own reality. Play bad, lose, don't do anything to improve, keep losing and lose more by being more frustrated.

It's easy to get better as a poker player, but it's not easy for some people to take responsibility for their failings. Instead they blame the others, and do so without making the slightest effort to gain any evidence.

[Bongo]

Originally Posted by corpfan1

The only reason I started this thread is to get the sense of what affiliates think out there...

UB is now being accused of cheating....and....other sites have been suspected in the past.

But...most importantly....some people are taking it very personally and trashing affiliates who promote rooms who are suspected of this. And, I don't like that. We are being called all kinds of names if we still promote AP and now starting to be the same with UB. I think this is very unfortunate.

Well, I believe that an affiliates job is to keep potential players informed. If there is a good indication of cheating at a site, then an affiliate should protect the players they recruit. If they ignore the signs and continue to promote dishonest poker sites, they can expect to be slated in a forum setting. People will start to see it for what it is, a disregard for the players interests to pursue personal greed. The attitudes of these affiliates resemble that of a site called Absolute Poker. I dont think they should be patted on the back for it, nor do I think they deserve to consider themselves a separate entity from the offending site.

In my opinion, the informed affiliate has a choice, either stand by a moral code or accept the dishonest reputation they deserve.

[PPP]

Originally Posted by Andromedan

I am getting out of the discussion.

The fact is I'm a bad player, ok. Great logic

It is, and obviously so too. If somebody is a losing player after five years and they still have not looked at hand histories for an explanation that's exactly like a losing race driver not looking at his engine, to even see if he has oil in the car.

A losing player who wants to win but has never looked at hand histories is a bad player, period.

[Andromedan]

Go to pokerconduct.com, and read every single article there is, and then tell me it is all lies and coincidence, and people not looking at hand histories (very smart distracting argument by the way, although it might be true in some cases).

Originally Posted by PPP

It is, and obviously so too. If somebody is a losing player after five years and they still have not looked at hand histories for an explanation that's exactly like a losing race driver not looking at his engine, to even see if he has oil in the car.

A losing player who wants to win but has never looked at hand histories is a bad player, period.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by Andromedan

Go to pokerconduct.com, and read every single article there is, and then tell me it is all lies and coincidence, and people not looking at hand histories (very smart distracting argument by the way, although it might be true in some cases).

Try live games if it's so easy to win... and then you'll blame dealers and casinos. You're a loser if you can't figure out why you keep losing over & over again. And blaming something that you can't prove to be true doesn't mean "figuring it out".

PPP is absolutely right. Seriously, how the hell can you expect to win if you've never studied your own game in FIVE YEARS of playing poker? Then you take away the credit from people who actually spend hours a day just going through their hand histories.